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

Éric David Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1990-09-13 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 Hawkesbury Hawks CCHL 61 6 11 17 0.279 0.0605 0.0591 0.2156 0.2108
2010-11 — CCHL 60 8 23 31 0.517 0.1121 0.1041 0.3998 0.3711
■ 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
2014-15 Elmira D3 UCHC — 26 4 7 11 0.423
2013-14 Elmira D3 UCHC — 25 4 11 15 0.600
2012-13 Elmira D3 UCHC — 25 3 6 9 0.360
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.36
2012-13 · Elmira
+342.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#12576
Defenseman overall
#1438
Defenseman born in 1990
#1062
in CCHL

D1 Comparables

William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Benjamin Gallacher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kyle Wadden
SUNY Morrisville · 2017-18
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Riley Riddell
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2006-07
0.273 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Dylan Reynolds
Saint Anselm · 2024-25
0.214 Developing
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.