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

Michael Amelio Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin Country: USA
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
2013-14 Washington Jr. Nationals EHL 43 1 16 17 0.395 0.0848 0.0848 0.1936 0.1936
■ 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 Saint Mary's D3 — SR 19 0 4 4 0.210
2016-17 Saint Mary's D3 — JR 25 1 3 4 0.160
2015-16 Saint Mary's D3 — SO 22 0 5 5 0.227
2014-15 Saint Mary's D3 — FR 4 0 1 1 0.250
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.25
2014-15 · Saint Mary's
+212.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#14607
Defenseman overall
#1446
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Kyle Mackey
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Air Force (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Derek Smith
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.35 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Joseph Grabowski
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Princeton (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Zach Yoder
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.10 PPG
→ Air Force (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.07 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Jake Bischoff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Josh Smith
Bethel · 2012-13
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Stephen Ginand
UMass Dartmouth · 2009-10
0.778 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Alec Thieda
Norwich · 2008-09
0.654 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.