← New Search ↗ Social Card

Danny Weight Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2001-05-01 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
2017-18 U.S. National U17 Team NTDP-U18 57 19 18 37 0.649 0.4825 0.4946 2.4221 2.4827
2018-19 NTDP-U18 51 10 13 23 0.451 0.3352 0.3265 1.6829 1.6392
2019-20 Penticton Vees BCHL 58 25 35 60 1.034 0.3986 0.3986 1.5055 1.5055
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
2024-25 American International D1 AHA 34 5 7 12 0.353
2023-24 Colorado College D1 NCHC SR 6 1 0 1 0.167
2022-23 Colorado College D1 NCHC JR 22 1 3 4 0.182
2021-22 Colorado College D1 NCHC SO 32 1 11 12 0.375
2020-21 Boston College D1 HockeyEast 19 1 1 2 0.105
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.34
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.11
2020-21 · Boston College
-68.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

72%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
28%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#10182
Forward overall
#452
Forward born in 2001

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.66 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.49 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Penn State (0.76 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.40 PPG
→ RPI (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Curry · 2005-06
0.962 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Chatham · 2019-20
1.292 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Utica · 2016-17
0.864 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.