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

Dayne Bihn Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1983-12-09 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
2003-04 Toledo IceDiggers NAHL 46 16 16 32 0.696 0.2583 0.2465 0.7366 0.7030
■ 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
2007-08 Neumann D3 — SR 23 2 4 6 0.261
2006-07 Neumann D3 — JR 20 3 1 4 0.200
2005-06 Neumann D3 — SO 21 3 10 13 0.619
2004-05 Neumann D3 — FR 10 6 6 12 1.200
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.20
2004-05 · Neumann
+468.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#13798
Forward overall
#519
Forward born in 1983
#913
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ian Miller
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Evan Ritt
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Denver
0.24 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Connor Beatty
Endicott · 2018-19
1.333 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brian Hennessey
SUNY Oswego · 2012-13
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Chase Nieuwendyk
SUNY Brockport · 2010-11
0.667 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.