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

Mike Hayward Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1988-11-11 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
2008-09 Vaughan Vipers OJHL 48 3 21 24 0.500 0.1397 0.1303 0.3451 0.3219
■ 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
2012-13 SUNY Brockport D3 — SR 25 4 11 15 0.600
2011-12 SUNY Brockport D3 — JR 24 6 8 14 0.583
2010-11 SUNY Brockport D3 — SO 24 3 7 10 0.417
2009-10 SUNY Brockport D3 — FR 26 1 15 16 0.615
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.62
2009-10 · SUNY Brockport
+400.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#7939
Defenseman overall
#1183
Defenseman born in 1988
#2632
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Garret Peterson
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.35 PPG
→ Army (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Zink
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Micky Knox
Wisconsin-Stout · 2010-11
0.429 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Zach Lynes
SUNY Geneseo · 2014-15
0.294 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Dan Krug
Buffalo State · 2008-09
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.