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

Donny Flynn Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-12-31 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
2015-16 New Jersey Rockets EHL 39 22 30 52 1.333 0.2861 0.2956 0.6529 0.6747
2016-17 New Jersey Rockets EHL 47 18 58 76 1.617 0.3470 0.3429 0.7918 0.7824
■ 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
2021-22 Wilkes D3 MAC SR 24 10 32 42 1.750
2020-21 Wilkes D3 MAC JR 11 6 13 19 1.727
2019-20 Wilkes D3 MAC SO 27 27 24 51 1.889
2018-19 Wilkes D3 MAC FR 26 14 23 37 1.423
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.28
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.42
2018-19 · Wilkes
+413.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#9020
Forward overall
#348
Forward born in 1996
#16
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Siiro
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Princeton (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Average
NCAAe PPG
Gerald Mayhew
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.56 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Evan Ritt
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Denver
0.24 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Alec Hagaman
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2009-10
0.741 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Mike Kneeland
Lake Forest · 2003-04
1.429 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Max Rasberg
New England · 2015-16
0.964 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.