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

Patrick Coyne Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1990-10-07 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 Bismarck Bobcats NAHL 18 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2010-11 Bismarck Bobcats NAHL 12 0 3 3 0.250 0.0919 0.0880 0.2642 0.2529
■ 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
2014-15 Lawrence D3 NCHA SR 27 1 2 3 0.111
2013-14 Lawrence D3 NCHA JR 13 1 4 5 0.385
2012-13 Lawrence D3 NCHA SO 24 3 1 4 0.167
2011-12 Lawrence D3 NCHA FR 22 6 5 11 0.500
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.50
2011-12 · Lawrence
+564.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#56312
Forward overall
#2044
Forward born in 1990
#6587
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Wyatt Trumbley
Westfield State · 2014-15
0.462 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Nick Redmon
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2015-16
0.417 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Justin Charbonneau
Norwich · 2013-14
0.300 Developing
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.