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

Daniel Buchbinder Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-07-07 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 Penticton Vees BCHL 54 1 11 12 0.222 0.0828 0.0816 0.3238 0.3192
■ 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 UMass Lowell D1 HockeyEast SO 1 0 0 0 0.000
2024-25 UMass Lowell D1 HockeyEast — 15 0 1 1 0.067
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.07
2024-25 · UMass Lowell
-13.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

18%
NCAA D1
20%
NCAA D2/D3
38%
Age-Out / Club
25%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#19858
Defenseman overall
#3479
Defenseman born in 2004
#3213
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

James Roll
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Dan Molenaar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Neal Goff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Christian Neumann
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ UConn (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Joe Schuldt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Michigan Tech
0.05 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Bobby Polachek
Fredonia · 2013-14
0.958 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Owen Watson
SUNY Potsdam · 2022-23
0.308 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Mark Williams
Marian · 2006-07
0.826 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.