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

Matt Finley Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1983-09-19 Country: USA
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 Hawkesbury Hawks CCHL 53 3 12 15 0.283 0.0614 0.0595 0.2189 0.2120
2003-04 Hawkesbury Hawks CCHL 53 6 9 15 0.283 0.0614 0.0564 0.2189 0.2011
■ 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
2004-05 Wisconsin-Eau Claire D3 WIAC FR 13 3 0 3 0.231
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.23
2004-05 · Wisconsin-Eau Claire
+324.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#18655
Defenseman overall
#1309
Defenseman born in 1983
#1491
in CCHL

D1 Comparables

William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Phillip Middleton
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2015-16
0.615 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Victor Bergström
Plymouth State · 2015-16
0.471 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Coby Downs
Norwich · 2016-17
1.000 Elite
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.