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

Matt Lippa Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-11-11 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
2013-14 Wellington Dukes OJHL 0 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2014-15 Oakville Blades OJHL 51 22 24 46 0.902 0.2520 0.2361 0.6225 0.5832
■ 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
2018-19 Manhattanville D3 UCHC SR 32 21 27 48 1.500
2017-18 Manhattanville D3 UCHC JR 25 16 15 31 1.240
2016-17 Manhattanville D3 UCHC SO 26 15 10 25 0.962
2015-16 Manhattanville D3 UCHC FR 24 8 6 14 0.583
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.20
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.58
2015-16 · Manhattanville
+188.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#14395
Forward overall
#597
Forward born in 1994
#855
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Ian Miller
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Doucet
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Air Force (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Alex Nagel
Wisconsin-Stout · 2017-18
0.423 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Grant Newcomer
Concordia · 2021-22
0.518 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kyler Matthews
Canton · 2017-18
0.941 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.