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

Ashton Bynum Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-06-25 Country: USA
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
2022-23 Austin Bruins NAHL 38 0 6 6 0.158 0.0580 0.0610 0.1667 0.1752
2023-24 Austin Bruins NAHL 57 2 22 24 0.421 0.1547 0.1552 0.4445 0.4461
2024-25 Austin Bruins NAHL 47 10 20 30 0.638 0.2345 0.2230 0.7509 0.6810
■ 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 Brown D1 ECAC FR 17 1 0 1 0.059
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.06
2025-26 · Brown
-68.2% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

62%
NCAA D1
8%
NCAA D2/D3
22%
Age-Out / Club
8%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#7781
Defenseman overall
#1822
Defenseman born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 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
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jackson Tillinghast
Lake Forest · 2021-22
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Thomas Bishop
Suffolk · 2014-15
0.565 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Matthew Manning
Worcester State · 2016-17
0.750 Strong
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.