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

Matej Paul Flidr Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2000-06-11 Country: Czechia
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
2018-19 Tampa Bay Juniors USPHL-Premier 40 15 11 26 0.650 0.0850 0.0879 0.2206 0.2282
2019-20 Tampa Bay Juniors USPHL-Premier 32 11 6 17 0.531 0.0695 0.0695 0.1803 0.1803
2020-21 Tampa Bay Juniors USPHL-Premier 37 10 15 25 0.676 0.0884 0.0884 0.2293 0.2293
■ 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
2021-22 Worcester State D3 MASCAC — 8 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

5%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
85%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#27499
Forward overall
#1344
Forward born in 2000
#2086
in USPHL-Premier

D1 Comparables

Jason Ford
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Gage Torrel
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average
NCAAe PPG
Josh Nenadal
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.30 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Adam Johnson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.46 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG
Ryan McMurphy
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Bentley (0.39 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Adam McGill
New England College · 2018-19
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrew Mather
SUNY Oswego · 2005-06
0.308 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Vadim Kiryakov
Buffalo State · 2018-19
0.800 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.