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

Dane Carter Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-01-25 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 6 3 9 0.360 0.0694 0.0694 0.1647 0.1647
2022-23 Belmont Hill NE-Prep 30 7 18 25 0.833 0.1607 0.1607 0.3813 0.3813
2023-24 Renfrew Wolves CCHL 55 24 42 66 1.200 0.2603 0.2494 0.9289 0.8900
■ 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 Trinity D3 NESCAC SO 3 1 0 1 0.333
2024-25 Trinity D3 NESCAC — 8 2 0 2 0.250
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.25
2024-25 · Trinity
+36.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

42%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
12%
Age-Out / Club
38%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#18488
Forward overall
#951
Forward born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Siiro
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Princeton (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Average
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Adam Kudynski
Lebanon Valley · 2003-04
0.909 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Arlen Marshall
Manhattanville · 2004-05
0.840 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
John Moncovich
Utica · 2017-18
0.864 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.