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

Hayes Hundley Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2005-03-22 Country: USA
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
2023-24 — NAHL 53 3 8 11 0.207 0.0762 0.0793 0.2190 0.2279
2024-25 Fargo Force USHL 58 4 12 16 0.276 0.1628 0.1537 0.8286 0.7821
■ 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 St. Thomas D1 CCHA FR 38 6 6 12 0.316
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.32
2025-26 · St. Thomas
+169.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

68%
NCAA D1
18%
NCAA D2/D3
12%
Age-Out / Club
2%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Vinny Muto
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Niagara (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Johnny Hrabovsky
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Max Everson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Harvard (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Victor Björkung
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Aleksi Rossi
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ Brown
0.08 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Zack Bross
UMass Boston · 2015-16
1.518 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
William Johnson
St. Olaf · 2023-24
0.650 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Ben Kemp
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2000-01
0.536 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.