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

Daniel McMullan Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1994-11-01 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
2013-14 Connecticut RoughRiders EHL 42 6 17 23 0.548 0.0802 0.0815 0.2682 0.2724
■ 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
2017-18 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC SR 24 3 8 11 0.458
2016-17 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC JR 17 1 1 2 0.118
2015-16 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC SO 25 1 7 8 0.320
2014-15 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC FR 23 5 6 11 0.478
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.48
2014-15 · Bowdoin
+522.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#7250
Defenseman overall
#1132
Defenseman born in 1994
#906
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Mike Preston
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.07 PPG
→ Army (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Joe Schuldt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Michigan Tech
0.05 No data
NCAAe PPG
Neal Goff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Cliff Watson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Eric Schurhamer
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Maine (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mason Swenson
Bethel · 2007-08
0.609 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyson Bruce
SUNY Oswego · 2014-15
0.333 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Liam Feeney
Trinity · 2014-15
0.710 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.