← New Search ↗ Social Card

David Dell Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2002-01-24 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
2021-22 New York Apple Core EHL 36 3 7 10 0.278 0.0642 0.0642 0.1359 0.1359
2022-23 Protec Jr. Ducks EHL 46 5 25 30 0.652 0.1507 0.1429 0.3191 0.3026
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 University of Michigan-Dearborn ACHA_D1 33 7 23 30 0.909
2024-25 University of Michigan-Dearborn ACHA_D1 33 7 23 30 0.909
2023-24 University of Michigan-Dearborn ACHA_D1 33 7 23 30 0.909
2022-23 University of Michigan-Dearborn ACHA_D1 33 7 23 30 0.909
2021-22 University of Michigan-Dearborn ACHA_D1 33 7 23 30 0.909
2020-21 University of Michigan-Dearborn ACHA_D1 33 7 23 30 0.909

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

40%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#8685
Defenseman overall
#1946
Defenseman born in 2002
#1102
in EHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ RIT (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Hamline · 2013-14
0.414 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
UMass Dartmouth · 2015-16
0.480 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Concordia · 2024-25
0.259 Developing
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.