IcePath icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
← New Search ↗ Social Card

Carl D'Amour-Belizario Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1993-08-22 Country: Canada
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

NCAA D3 / D2

Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw PPG  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adjusted NCAAe-PPG  ·  ■ Green = actual college PPG
Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP G A Pts PPG NCAAe-PPG Age-Adj D3e-PPG Age-Adj
2012-13 Cornwall Colts CCHL 46 9 28 37 0.804 0.1745 0.1710 0.6221 0.6095
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div Conference Year GP G A Pts PPG
2016-17 Hobart D3 SUNYAC SR 25 4 11 15 0.600
2015-16 Hobart D3 SUNYAC JR 28 4 10 14 0.500
2014-15 Hobart D3 SUNYAC SO 26 1 10 11 0.423
2013-14 Hobart D3 SUNYAC FR 27 5 11 16 0.593
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.59
2013-14 · Hobart
+267.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#4322
Defenseman overall
#715
Defenseman born in 1993
#374
in CCHL

D1 Comparables

Christian Neumann
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ UConn (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Tommy Davis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Princeton (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Neal Goff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Mike McKee
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Joe Schuldt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Michigan Tech
0.05 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Alex Porrier
Johnson & Wales · 2009-10
0.654 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Malcolm Arseneau
Fredonia · 2017-18
0.818 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Caleb Suderman
Concordia · 2008-09
0.630 Average
actual D2/3 PPG

How to read this: NCAAe and D3e factors convert a player's junior PPG into expected NCAA scoring at the D1 or D3 level. Harder conferences → lower projected PPG for the same player. A strong junior player (e.g. USHL 0.90 PPG) will project much higher in NESCAC than Big Ten because the D3 scoring environment is lower-difficulty.

Strength factor: conferences above 1.0 are harder than average; below 1.0 are easier. The formula is: Base NCAAe PPG ÷ Conference Strength = Projected PPG.