← New Search ↗ Social Card

Dustin Dubas Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1985-11-07 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
2002-03 Yorkton Terriers SJHL 3 0 0 0 0.000
2003-04 La Ronge Ice Wolves SJHL 57 4 15 19 0.333 0.0854 0.0905 0.2508 0.2658
2004-05 La Ronge Ice Wolves SJHL 46 7 17 24 0.522 0.1337 0.1352 0.3925 0.3968
2005-06 La Ronge Ice Wolves SJHL 53 1 16 17 0.321 0.0822 0.0792 0.2414 0.2327
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
2008-09 St. Norbert D3 NCHA JR 24 2 4 6 0.250
2007-08 St. Norbert D3 NCHA SO 22 2 4 6 0.273
2006-07 St. Norbert D3 NCHA FR 12 0 2 2 0.167
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.10
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.17
2006-07 · St. Norbert
+73.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#14438
Defenseman overall
#1333
Defenseman born in 1985
#1201
in SJHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Providence (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Amherst · 2015-16
0.542 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Salem State · 2015-16
0.286 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Manhattanville · 2014-15
0.375 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.