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

Dylan Samberg Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1999-01-24 Country: USA
2017 · Round 2, Pick #43  ·  Winnipeg Jets Winnipeg Jets
Signed Professionally

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
2014-15 — USHS-MN 11 1 0 1 0.091 0.0115 0.0120 0.0221 0.0231
2016-17 — USHL 6 1 1 2 0.333 0.1966 0.2046 1.0010 1.0416
■ 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
2019-20 Minnesota Duluth D1 NCHC JR 28 1 20 21 0.750
2018-19 Minnesota Duluth D1 NCHC SO 39 7 12 19 0.487
2017-18 Minnesota Duluth D1 NCHC FR 42 1 12 13 0.309
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.31
2017-18 · Minnesota Duluth
+157.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Jack Stander
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Canisius (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Clint Lewis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.30 PPG
→ Cornell (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Garrett Cecere
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.09 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Mark Auk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Roy
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.30 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Pat Egan
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2012-13
1.080 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Simon Boyko
Aurora · 2016-17
1.037 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2000-01
1.800 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.