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

Dan Krmpotich 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
2000-01 Waterloo Black Hawks USHL 55 20 26 46 0.836 0.4934 0.4934 2.5120 2.5120
2001-02 — USHL 57 10 21 31 0.544 0.3208 0.3208 1.6335 1.6335
■ 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
2005-06 St. Thomas D3 CCHA SR 27 12 23 35 1.296
2004-05 St. Thomas D3 CCHA JR 31 20 20 40 1.290
2003-04 St. Thomas D3 CCHA SO 25 14 16 30 1.200
2002-03 St. Thomas D3 CCHA FR 25 3 11 14 0.560
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.33
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.56
2002-03 · St. Thomas
+67.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#8853
Forward overall
#721
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Thomas Ebbing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kyle Osterberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.77 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jason Salvaggio
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Mitch Hults
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tony Calderone
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.69 PPG
→ Michigan (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

John Moncovich
Utica · 2016-17
0.864 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Caden Smith
Chatham · 2019-20
1.292 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Chris Atkinson
Curry · 2005-06
0.962 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.