← New Search ↗ Social Card

Evan Malkhassian Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2007-08-29 Country: Canada
Harvard
ECAC D1

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
2022-23 Newmarket Hurricanes OJHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2023-24 Newmarket Hurricanes OJHL 56 14 24 38 0.679 0.1663 0.1881 0.4671 0.5282
2024-25 Austin Bruins NAHL 54 8 22 30 0.556 0.2041 0.2265 0.5872 0.6517
2025-26 Lincoln Stars USHL 41 1 4 5 0.122 0.0720 0.0733 0.3661 0.3725
2026-27 Lincoln Stars USHL 4 0 3 3 0.750 0.4424 0.4424 2.2505 2.2505
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

100%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#37012
Forward overall
#1502
Forward born in 2007

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.57 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ Wisconsin-Stout (0.59 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.78 PPG
→ RPI (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.70 PPG
→ Vermont (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.94 PPG
→ Yale (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.53 Average
NCAAe PPG

Harvard Alumni similar profiles who attended this school

NE-Prep 2024-25
0.00
actual FR PPG at Harvard
NE-Prep 2018-19
0.89
actual FR PPG at Harvard
NE-Prep 2022-23
0.53
actual FR PPG at Harvard
BCHL 2012-13
0.52
actual FR PPG at Harvard

D2/3 Comparables

Wilkes · 2016-17
1.385 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Southern New Hampshire · 2014-15
0.833 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Utica · 2017-18
1.448 Elite
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.