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

Mathis Bédard Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-10-04 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
2022-23 Ottawa Jr. Senators CCHL 52 5 28 33 0.635 0.1376 0.1370 0.4910 0.4890
2023-24 — CCHL 58 7 28 35 0.603 0.1309 0.1234 0.4669 0.4401
■ 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
2024-25 Aurora D3 NCHA — 30 4 14 18 0.600
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.60
2024-25 · Aurora
+393.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

25%
NCAA D1
15%
NCAA D2/D3
38%
Age-Out / Club
22%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#7063
Defenseman overall
#1670
Defenseman born in 2003
#617
in CCHL

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
Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Benjamin Gallacher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Elite D
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

Gabriel Filion
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2024-25
0.577 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Dan Cecka
Wisconsin-Stout · 2009-10
0.556 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Quinn Booth
Suffolk · 2024-25
0.429 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.