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

Matthew Verspeeten Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2005-05-31 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
2023-24 — CCHL 44 7 5 12 0.273 0.0591 0.0606 0.2089 0.2142
2024-25 — CCHL 49 8 8 16 0.327 0.0708 0.0694 0.2501 0.2452
■ 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
2025-26 Arcadia D3 MAC FR 22 5 5 10 0.455
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.45
2025-26 · Arcadia
+705.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

8%
NCAA D1
8%
NCAA D2/D3
48%
Age-Out / Club
35%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#47993
Forward overall
#3198
Forward born in 2005
#1414
in CCHL

D1 Comparables

Ben Greiner
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Spezia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matthew Hansen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.25 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
William Messa
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Northeastern
0.12 No data
NCAAe PPG
Josh Erickson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Isaac Barrett
Utica · 2023-24
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Chris Taff
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2013-14
0.867 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Mike Economos
Plymouth State · 2011-12
0.741 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.