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

Dalton Carter Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1993-11-12 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
2012-13 Kalamazoo Jr. K-Wings NAHL 5 0 2 2 0.400 0.1485 0.1504 0.4235 0.4289
2013-14 Northern Cyclones EHL 28 4 21 25 0.893 0.1916 0.1853 0.4373 0.4230
■ 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
2017-18 Utica D3 UCHC SR 26 11 28 39 1.500
2016-17 Utica D3 UCHC JR 27 2 14 16 0.593
2015-16 Utica D3 UCHC SO 27 4 5 9 0.333
2014-15 Utica D3 UCHC FR 26 6 12 18 0.692
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.69
2014-15 · Utica
+328.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#4519
Defenseman overall
#803
Defenseman born in 1993

D1 Comparables

Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Zink
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Garret Peterson
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.35 PPG
→ Army (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Blake Thompson
St. Norbert · 2012-13
0.767 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Cody Pisarczyk
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2024-25
0.462 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Dan Swanson
Concordia · 2005-06
0.000 No data
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.