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

Declan Carlile Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2000-05-18 Country: USA
Signed Professionally

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 — OJHL 54 6 33 39 0.722 0.1770 0.1884 0.4972 0.5293
2018-19 — USHL 59 4 15 19 0.322 0.1899 0.1909 0.9671 0.9720
■ 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
2021-22 Merrimack D1 HockeyEast JR 35 7 17 24 0.686
2020-21 Merrimack D1 HockeyEast SO 14 2 8 10 0.714
2019-20 Merrimack D1 HockeyEast FR 34 4 18 22 0.647
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.65
2019-20 · Merrimack
+260.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

65%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
32%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Chris Leibinger
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Scott Moldenhauer
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Benning
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.39 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Josh McArdle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Brown (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Dan Renouf
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.49 PPG
→ Maine (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Ty Enns
Marian · 2016-17
0.923 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Bryan Tang
Skidmore · 2023-24
0.571 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Mark Mazzetti
Elmira · 2002-03
0.565 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.