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

Evan Haney Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1990-05-09 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
2009-10 Hamilton Red Wings OJHL 50 16 22 38 0.760 0.1863 0.1779 0.5233 0.4996
■ 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
2013-14 Hamilton D3 NESCAC SR 22 3 4 7 0.318
2012-13 Hamilton D3 NESCAC JR 20 5 3 8 0.400
2011-12 Hamilton D3 NESCAC SO 19 4 4 8 0.421
2010-11 Hamilton D3 NESCAC FR 25 3 6 9 0.360
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.36
2010-11 · Hamilton
+136.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#24314
Forward overall
#912
Forward born in 1990
#1101
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Tommy Schutt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matthew Hansen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.25 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tanner Pond
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Spezia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mitchell Parsons
SUNY Brockport · 2016-17
0.577 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Cann
Elmira · 2003-04
0.786 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Luke Pepin
Salem State · 2018-19
0.579 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.