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

Corey Hayashi Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-06-05 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
2013-14 Mississauga Chargers OJHL 53 8 15 23 0.434 0.1064 0.0976 0.2971 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 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC SR 28 4 19 23 0.821
2016-17 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC JR 20 2 7 9 0.450
2015-16 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC SO 17 2 1 3 0.176
2014-15 Fitchburg State D3 MASCAC FR 12 0 4 4 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2014-15 · Fitchburg State
+299.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#40310
Forward overall
#1458
Forward born in 1993
#2610
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Austin Whelan
Curry · 2018-19
0.350 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Mike Foy
SUNY Potsdam · 2007-08
0.750 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Connor Hutchins
SUNY Brockport · 2015-16
1.080 Elite
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.