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

Daniel Winnik Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1985-03-06 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
2001-02 Wexford Raiders OJHL 47 18 25 43 0.915 0.2242 0.2396 0.6299 0.6733
2002-03 Wexford Raiders OJHL 47 20 33 53 1.128 0.2764 0.2840 0.7764 0.7977
■ 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
2005-06 New Hampshire D1 HockeyEast JR 39 15 26 41 1.051
2004-05 New Hampshire D1 HockeyEast SO 42 18 22 40 0.952
2003-04 New Hampshire D1 HockeyEast FR 37 4 10 14 0.378
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.23
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.38
2003-04 · New Hampshire
+66.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#15061
Forward overall
#483
Forward born in 1985
#466
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Garrett Gamez
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Providence (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Luke Stork
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Polino
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.40 PPG
→ RPI (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Andrew Oglevie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alex Talcott
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Michigan
0.18 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Matthew Grannan
Bethel · 2021-22
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Austin Langworthy
Bethel · 2014-15
0.400 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Spencer DeRidder
Salem State · 2016-17
0.522 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.