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

David Backes Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1984-05-01 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
2001-02 Lincoln Stars USHL 30 11 10 21 0.700 0.4303 0.4633 2.0623 2.2206
2002-03 Lincoln Stars USHL 55 28 39 67 1.218 0.7488 0.7598 3.5891 3.6417
■ 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 Minnesota State D1 — JR 38 13 29 42 1.105
2004-05 Minnesota State D1 — SO 38 17 23 40 1.053
2003-04 Minnesota State D1 — FR 39 16 21 37 0.949
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.60
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.95
2003-04 · Minnesota State
+58.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3680
Forward overall
#112
Forward born in 1984
#117
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Nick Schilkey
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.20 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.70 D1 FR PPG)
0.74 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Vinnie Hinostroza
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.30 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.94 D1 FR PPG)
0.80 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Dennis Kravchenko
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ UMass (0.92 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Peter Quenneville
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.80 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Toninato
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.09 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.67 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Filimon Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
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.