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

Dean Schwenninger Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2001-03-05 Country: Switzerland
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
2021-22 Minot Minotauros NAHL 50 11 25 36 0.720 0.2645 0.2473 0.7600 0.7106
■ 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
2023-24 Stonehill D1 AHA — 36 4 9 13 0.361
2022-23 Stonehill D1 NE10 — 23 10 22 32 1.391
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.39
2022-23 · Stonehill
+557.2% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

30%
NCAA D1
12%
NCAA D2/D3
38%
Age-Out / Club
20%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#17045
Forward overall
#808
Forward born in 2001
#935
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Glenn Wiswell
Castleton · 2016-17
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Hunter Hayes
St. Olaf · 2024-25
0.708 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Gage Christianson
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2012-13
0.741 Strong
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.