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

P.J. Fenton Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1985-08-26 Country: USA
2005 · Round 6, Pick #162  ·  San Jose Sharks San Jose Sharks
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
2002-03 Springfield Jr. Pics EJHL 52 12 23 35 0.673 0.1994 0.2111 — —
2003-04 Springfield Jr. Pics EJHL 40 19 18 37 0.925 0.2741 0.2816 — —
■ 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
2007-08 UMass D1 HockeyEast SR 36 9 19 28 0.778
2006-07 UMass D1 HockeyEast JR 39 10 15 25 0.641
2005-06 UMass D1 HockeyEast SO 35 5 12 17 0.486
2004-05 UMass D1 HockeyEast FR 38 13 12 25 0.658
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.22
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.66
2004-05 · UMass
+203.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#22305
Forward overall
#712
Forward born in 1985
#99
in EJHL

D1 Comparables

Kyle Osterberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.77 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Zach Aston-Reese
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average
NCAAe PPG
Thomas Ebbing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Grant Besse
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.39 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average
NCAAe PPG
Justin Greenberg
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Miami (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Developing
NCAAe 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.