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

Josh Eernisse

Position: Forward DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin Country: ?
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
2019-20 Eastview USHS-MN 25 21 13 34 1.360 0.3661 0.3661 0.3303 0.3303
■ 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 Michigan D1 BigTen SR 38 11 8 19 0.500
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.31
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.50
2025-26 · Michigan
+59.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

8%
NCAA D2/D3
2%
Club / ACHA
52%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#10648
Forward overall
#320
in USHS-MN

D1 Comparables

Jason Salvaggio
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kyle Osterberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.77 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Tony Calderone
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.69 PPG
→ Michigan (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Thomas Ebbing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Michigan (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Mitch Hults
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brett Bandazian
Skidmore · 2005-06
0.708 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Eric Selleck
SUNY Oswego · 2005-06
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brian Miller
Nazareth · 2014-15
0.615 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.