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

David Hines Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1987-01-16 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
2005-06 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 44 1 1 2 0.045 0.0180 0.0182 0.0478 0.0483
2006-07 — NAHL 55 2 4 6 0.109 0.0432 0.0415 0.1145 0.1100
2007-08 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 51 4 14 18 0.353 0.1398 0.1275 0.3705 0.3378
■ 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
2011-12 Augsburg D3 MIAC SR 25 3 12 15 0.600
2010-11 Augsburg D3 MIAC JR 26 2 9 11 0.423
2009-10 Augsburg D3 — SO 27 4 15 19 0.704
2008-09 Augsburg D3 — FR 26 3 8 11 0.423
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.09
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.42
2008-09 · Augsburg
+381.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#20111
Defenseman overall
#1664
Defenseman born in 1987
#5887
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Michael Holland
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ RIT (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Carter Foguth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Steve Miles
Salem State · 2007-08
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon MacKinnon
Concordia (WI) · 2017-18
0.478 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Mac Jansen
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2013-14
0.409 Average
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.