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

Dan Law Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1981-11-25 Country: Canada
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
2000-01 Powell River Kings BCHL 59 32 32 64 1.085 0.4179 0.4149 1.5786 1.5672
2001-02 — BCHL 53 25 22 47 0.887 0.3417 0.3204 1.2906 1.2101
■ 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
2004-05 Manhattanville D3 UCHC JR 21 7 6 13 0.619
2003-04 Manhattanville D3 UCHC SO 18 3 6 9 0.500
2002-03 Manhattanville D3 UCHC FR 26 10 9 19 0.731
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.31
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.73
2002-03 · Manhattanville
+138.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#11447
Forward overall
#385
Forward born in 1981
#353
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Joseph-Matthew Manno
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.63 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Gerald Mayhew
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.56 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Emil Romig
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Denver (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Harrison Follett
Misericordia · 2023-24
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Dante Spagnuolo
Adrian · 2018-19
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Michel Bond
SUNY Geneseo · 2001-02
1.083 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.