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

Mike Benning Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2002-01-05 Country: Canada
Signed Professionally

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
2018-19 — AJHL 60 10 51 61 1.017 0.3396 0.3739 0.9438 1.0392
2019-20 — AJHL 54 12 63 75 1.389 0.4639 0.4639 1.2893 1.2893
■ 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
2022-23 Denver D1 NCHC JR 39 13 21 34 0.872
2021-22 Denver D1 NCHC SO 41 15 23 38 0.927
2020-21 Denver D1 NCHC FR 21 3 8 11 0.524
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.35
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.52
2020-21 · Denver
+48.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

42%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
57%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Mark Friedman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
R.J. Gicewicz
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Keaton Thompson
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Corey Schueneman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Jack Glover
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brycon Johnson
Bryn Athyn · 2012-13
0.778 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Chris Cannizzaro
Hobart · 2004-05
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Chad Merrell
New England · 2015-16
0.611 Average
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.