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

Dan Carlson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1983-07-01 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 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 43 11 12 23 0.535 0.1986 0.1852 0.5664 0.5280
■ 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 Augsburg D3 — SR 25 9 8 17 0.680
2006-07 Augsburg D3 — JR 21 2 5 7 0.333
2005-06 Augsburg D3 — SO 25 7 18 25 1.000
2004-05 Augsburg D3 — FR 25 6 21 27 1.080
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.08
2004-05 · Augsburg
+581.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#20419
Forward overall
#698
Forward born in 1983
#1961
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Cody Marooney
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jayson Angus
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.66 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bob Kinne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kenny Matheson
Hamilton · 2011-12
0.889 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Colin Phaneuf
St. Scholastica · 2010-11
0.400 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Fackey
New England College · 2004-05
0.792 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.