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

James DeHaas Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1994-05-03 Country: Canada
2012 · Round 6, Pick #170  ·  Detroit Red Wings Detroit Red Wings
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
2011-12 Toronto Patriots OJHL 45 10 19 29 0.644 0.1579 0.1679 0.4437 0.4717
2012-13 Penticton Vees BCHL 53 5 19 24 0.453 0.1745 0.1783 0.6590 0.6733
■ 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
2016-17 Clarkson D1 ECAC — 37 7 22 29 0.784
2015-16 Clarkson D1 ECAC — 38 5 12 17 0.447
2014-15 Clarkson D1 ECAC — 36 6 9 15 0.417
2013-14 Clarkson D1 ECAC — 38 6 7 13 0.342
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.34
2013-14 · Clarkson
+108.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#8292
Defenseman overall
#1221
Defenseman born in 1994

D1 Comparables

Scott Moldenhauer
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Josh McArdle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Brown (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Chris Leibinger
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dane Cooper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Brown (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Justin Wade
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.10 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Scott Hudson
Manhattanville · 2006-07
1.231 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Jake Hodd-Chlebeck
Saint John's · 2023-24
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Maxwell Cole
Salem State · 2017-18
0.000 No data
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.