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

Daniel Sandvig Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1998-07-30 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
2014-15 Burnsville High USHS-MN 3 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2017-18 Mason City Toros NA3HL 32 11 24 35 1.094 0.1394 0.1377 0.3523 0.3515
■ 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 Gustavus Adolphus D3 MIAC SR 22 1 4 5 0.227
2020-21 Gustavus Adolphus D3 MIAC JR 5 1 2 3 0.600
2019-20 Gustavus Adolphus D3 MIAC SO 16 2 1 3 0.188
2018-19 Gustavus Adolphus D3 MIAC FR 12 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

0%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
85%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#21078
Forward overall
#1031
Forward born in 1998

D1 Comparables

Josh Erickson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ben Greiner
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average
NCAAe PPG
Conor Andrle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Army (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Spezia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Terry Leabo
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2012-13
0.704 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jakub Hall
SUNY Potsdam · 2021-22
0.360 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Zach Kozak
Lake Forest · 2006-07
0.520 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.