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

Robb Haider Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1989-10-15 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 Fairbanks Ice Dogs NAHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2008-09 Alaska Avalanche NAHL 51 13 12 25 0.490 0.1801 0.1800 0.5174 0.5172
2009-10 Alaska Avalanche NAHL 54 13 19 32 0.593 0.2177 0.2088 0.6255 0.6001
■ 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
2010-11 Wisconsin-Stout D3 WIAC FR 10 2 3 5 0.500
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.50
2010-11 · Wisconsin-Stout
+196.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#25231
Forward overall
#843
Forward born in 1989
#2023
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Emil Romig
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Denver (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Matt Anastasio
SUNY Brockport · 2021-22
0.533 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Chris Santiago
Utica · 2009-10
0.769 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Gage Dill
Curry · 2021-22
1.000 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.