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

Jamie Oleksiak Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1992-12-21 Country: Canada
2011 · Round 1, Pick #14  ·  Dallas Stars Dallas Stars
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
2008-09 — USHL 29 0 4 4 0.138 0.0813 0.0930 0.4142 0.4738
2009-10 — USHL 53 2 12 14 0.264 0.1559 0.1683 0.7935 0.8568
2011-12 — OHL 59 12 20 32 0.542 0.3138 0.3073 1.3937 1.3650
■ 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
2010-11 Northeastern D1 HockeyEast FR 38 4 9 13 0.342
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.34
2010-11 · Northeastern
+162.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6089
Defenseman overall
#976
Defenseman born in 1992

D1 Comparables

Nelson Armstrong
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Lowney
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Dakota Mermis
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Denver (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Matias Cleland
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Gluchowski
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.40 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.55 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Blake Ulve
St. Norbert · 2020-21
0.552 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Robbie Murden
Hamilton · 2010-11
1.091 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Mickey Gilchrist
Middlebury · 2003-04
1.000 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.