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

J.T. Brown Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1990-07-02 Country: USA
Signed Professionally
IF Björklöven · Allsvenskan

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
2008-09 Waterloo Black Hawks USHL 36 14 22 36 1.000 0.5899 0.6018 2.9462 3.0056
2009-10 Waterloo Black Hawks USHL 60 34 43 77 1.283 0.7570 0.7238 3.7809 3.6151
2020-21 IF Björklöven Allsvenskan 19 6 6 12 0.632 1.5790 1.5790 — —
■ 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
2011-12 Minnesota Duluth D1 WCHA-orig — 39 24 23 47 1.205
2010-11 Minnesota Duluth D1 WCHA-orig — 42 16 21 37 0.881
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.63
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.88
2010-11 · Minnesota Duluth
+40.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#1180
Forward overall
#56
Forward born in 1990

D1 Comparables

J.T. Stenglein
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.04 PPG
→ Michigan (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.59 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Stepan
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.39 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.81 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Peter Quenneville
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.11 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.80 D1 FR PPG)
0.65 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Toninato
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.09 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.64 Average
NCAAe PPG
Kyle Novak
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.20 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.65 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Filimon Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
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.