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

David Rath Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-08-13 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
2011-12 Cornwall Colts CCHL 46 5 10 15 0.326 0.0707 0.0688 0.2523 0.2454
■ 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
2015-16 St. Olaf D3 MIAC SR 22 5 3 8 0.364
2014-15 St. Olaf D3 MIAC JR 24 0 5 5 0.208
2013-14 St. Olaf D3 MIAC SO 26 6 10 16 0.615
2012-13 St. Olaf D3 MIAC FR 24 2 6 8 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2012-13 · St. Olaf
+465.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#45992
Forward overall
#1753
Forward born in 1992
#1337
in CCHL

D1 Comparables

Josh Erickson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Conor Andrle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Army (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Average
NCAAe PPG
Ben Greiner
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Spezia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Thomas Rockey
Endicott · 2022-23
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Danil Kalashnikov
Concordia · 2010-11
0.368 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Collier
Bowdoin · 2010-11
0.560 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.