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

Chad Bennett Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1991-10-22 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 Brampton Capitals OJHL 55 16 15 31 0.564 0.1575 0.1618 0.3889 0.3996
2010-11 Brampton Capitals OJHL 50 22 27 49 0.980 0.2738 0.2686 0.6763 0.6634
2011-12 — OJHL 48 15 26 41 0.854 0.2387 0.2236 0.5895 0.5522
■ 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 Fredonia D3 — SO 17 3 3 6 0.353
2012-13 Fredonia D3 — FR 17 4 2 6 0.353
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.35
2012-13 · Fredonia
+70.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#16545
Forward overall
#655
Forward born in 1991
#1098
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Ryan Doucet
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Air Force (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ian Miller
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Emil Romig
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Denver (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jonathan Grebosky
Concordia · 2013-14
0.769 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Zac Sikich
SUNY Brockport · 2013-14
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Carter Krenke
Saint John's · 2024-25
0.704 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.