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

Matt McKeown Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1985-01-16 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
2002-03 Burlington Cougars OJHL 36 9 14 23 0.639 0.1919 0.1959 0.4373 0.4464
■ 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
2008-09 Fredonia D3 — JR 24 3 8 11 0.458
2007-08 Fredonia D3 — SO 26 7 11 18 0.692
2006-07 Fredonia D3 — FR 22 11 9 20 0.909
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.91
2006-07 · Fredonia
+442.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#29480
Forward overall
#898
Forward born in 1985
#1895
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Ryan Siroky
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Miami (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Joe Widmar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ UMass (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Andrew Oglevie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jake Evans
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alex Talcott
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Michigan
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Adam Kudynski
Lebanon Valley · 2001-02
0.909 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Caleb Serre
Wisconsin-Stout · 2016-17
0.600 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Patrick Gazich
Gustavus Adolphus · 2014-15
0.500 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.