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

Pat Dalbec Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1991-01-06 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
2009-10 Janesville Jets NAHL 48 11 14 25 0.521 0.1913 0.1953 0.5497 0.5611
■ 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
2013-14 Wisconsin-Superior D3 BigTen SR 29 12 15 27 0.931
2012-13 Wisconsin-Superior D3 WIAC JR 26 15 12 27 1.038
2011-12 Wisconsin-Superior D3 WIAC SO 27 13 9 22 0.815
2010-11 Wisconsin-Superior D3 WIAC FR 30 8 11 19 0.633
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.63
2010-11 · Wisconsin-Superior
+278.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#26920
Forward overall
#966
Forward born in 1991
#2256
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Blake Winiecki
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jeff Kubiak
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Cornell (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Austin Vieth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Seth Adams
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Canon Pieper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Eric Rubino
Williams · 2007-08
0.364 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
George Curry
Canton · 2010-11
0.467 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan Oye
Fredonia · 2005-06
0.556 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.