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

Danny Bagnole Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-12-21 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
2023-24 Anchorage Wolverines NAHL 50 14 12 26 0.520 0.1931 0.1985 0.5506 0.5660
2024-25 Anchorage Wolverines NAHL 55 28 26 54 0.982 0.3645 0.3556 1.0395 1.0141
■ 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
2025-26 SUNY Geneseo D3 — FR 25 5 8 13 0.520
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.25
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.52
2025-26 · SUNY Geneseo
+107.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

50%
NCAA D1
15%
NCAA D2/D3
30%
Age-Out / Club
5%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#10922
Forward overall
#471
Forward born in 2004
#533
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Gerald Mayhew
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.56 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Siiro
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Princeton (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Average
NCAAe PPG
Evan Ritt
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Denver
0.24 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lucas Romero
Westfield State · 2008-09
1.044 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Guzzo
Curry · 2006-07
0.852 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Bryan Yim
Adrian · 2013-14
1.138 Elite
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.