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

Marc Baron Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1997-10-23 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
2016-17 Atlanta Kings USPHL-Elite 8 1 1 2 0.250 0.0231 0.0232 0.0573 0.0575
2017-18 Atlanta Kings USPHL-Premier 39 5 16 21 0.538 0.0704 0.0673 0.1828 0.1747
■ 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
2019-20 Worcester State D3 MASCAC — 0 0 0 0 0.000
2018-19 Worcester State D1 MASCAC FR 16 1 3 4 0.250
2018-19 Worcester State D3 MASCAC — 16 1 3 4 0.250
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.25
2018-19 · Worcester State
+433.0% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

18%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#8381
Defenseman overall
#1509
Defenseman born in 1997

D1 Comparables

Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
Kyle McKenzie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Providence (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Skylar Christoffersen
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2005-06
0.200 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrew Graves
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2011-12
0.167 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Émile Tremblay
Westfield State · 2023-24
0.440 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.