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

Daniel Markham Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-05-13 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
2021-22 Belmont Hill NE-Prep 25 2 6 8 0.320 0.0617 0.0617 0.1464 0.1464
2023-24 Navan Grads CCHL 48 10 20 30 0.625 0.1356 0.1319 0.4838 0.4708
■ 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 Wesleyan D3 NESCAC — 23 5 8 13 0.565
2024-25 Wesleyan D3 NESCAC — 9 1 2 3 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.09
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2024-25 · Wesleyan
+274.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

28%
NCAA D1
15%
NCAA D2/D3
22%
Age-Out / Club
35%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#35734
Forward overall
#2201
Forward born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Matthew Hansen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.25 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Spezia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
William Messa
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Northeastern
0.12 No data
NCAAe PPG
Ben Greiner
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Keegan Milligan
St. Norbert · 2015-16
0.781 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Riley Prattson
Trinity · 2018-19
0.480 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Trevor Coykendall
Adrian · 2016-17
0.500 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.