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

Mike Serba Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1981-06-04 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
2000-01 Thornhill Rattlers OJHL 30 14 11 25 0.833 0.2042 0.1905 0.5737 0.5352
■ 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
2005-06 Norwich D3 LittleEast SR 29 13 15 28 0.966
2004-05 Norwich D3 LittleEast JR 26 10 11 21 0.808
2003-04 Norwich D3 LittleEast SO 26 6 11 17 0.654
2002-03 Norwich D3 LittleEast FR 23 4 12 16 0.696
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.70
2002-03 · Norwich
+326.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#21470
Forward overall
#580
Forward born in 1981
#883
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tanner Pond
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alfred Larsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Spezia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Spencer Barrow
Elmira · 2023-24
0.294 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Stefano Alonzi
SUNY Cortland · 2014-15
0.680 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Anthony Starzi
Stevenson · 2017-18
0.000 No data
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.