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

Dynnea Bezona Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin 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
2012-13 Arctic Bears USHS-W 24 10 11 21 0.875 0.2631 0.2631 — —
■ 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
2017-18 Endicott D3 NEHC JR 27 2 1 3 0.111
2016-17 Endicott D3 NEHC SO 21 1 4 5 0.238
2015-16 Endicott D3 NEHC FR 14 4 2 6 0.429
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.23
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.43
2015-16 · Endicott
+90.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#2765
Forward overall
#982
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Kiki Radke
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.58 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Brooke Madsen
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.60 PPG
→ Penn State (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Lydia Passolt
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.60 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Melissa Haganey
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Carly Radovich
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Sacred Heart (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Hayley Walsh
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2011-12
0.194 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Emily Rubinstein
Hamilton · 2011-12
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Julia Ireland
Middlebury · 2006-07
0.308 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.