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

Daniel Lemanski Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2003-07-13 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
2022-23 Worcester Jr. Railers EHL 44 8 11 19 0.432 0.0632 0.0646 0.2117 0.2163
■ 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
2025-26 Assumption D2 NE10 SR 24 6 3 9 0.375
2024-25 Assumption D2 NE10 JR 21 6 3 9 0.429
2023-24 Assumption D2 NE10 SO 11 1 2 3 0.273
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.27
2023-24 · Assumption
+393.1% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

12%
NCAA D2/D3
2%
Club / ACHA
38%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#36213
Forward overall
#2231
Forward born in 2003
#1362
in EHL

D1 Comparables

Josh Erickson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ben Greiner
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Spezia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Conor Andrle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Army (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Tyler Colacchio
Framingham State · 2013-14
0.350 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jack Forbort
Wisconsin-Stout · 2014-15
0.462 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Craig Lindegard
Wisconsin-Stout · 2011-12
0.391 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.