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

Mathew Thompson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-10-17 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 Caledon Admirals OJHL 43 15 19 34 0.791 0.2209 0.2179 0.5457 0.5382
2013-14 — OJHL 55 21 47 68 1.236 0.3455 0.3231 0.8532 0.7979
■ 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
2017-18 Adrian D3 NCHA SR 30 16 18 34 1.133
2016-17 Adrian D3 NCHA JR 18 6 8 14 0.778
2015-16 Adrian D3 NCHA SO 29 16 21 37 1.276
2014-15 Adrian D3 NCHA FR 28 23 20 43 1.536
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.24
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.54
2014-15 · Adrian
+538.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#10904
Forward overall
#395
Forward born in 1993
#526
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Emil Romig
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Denver (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Doucet
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Air Force (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sean Gaffney
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.14 PPG
→ UConn (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Beau Walker
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Sacred Heart (0.40 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Buster Larsson
Utica · 2018-19
0.679 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Adam Tretowicz
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2018-19
0.720 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Brenden Kotyk
St. Scholastica · 2011-12
0.760 Strong
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.