← New Search ↗ Social Card

Jonathan Lanza Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2005-03-10 Country: USA
Williams
NESCAC D3

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 Dexter NE-Prep 25 2 3 5 0.200 0.0396 0.0396 0.0911 0.0911
2022-23 Dexter NE-Prep 31 1 5 6 0.194 0.0383 0.0383 0.0882 0.0882
2023-24 Cowichan Valley Capitals BCHL 36 0 5 5 0.139 0.0535 0.0545 0.2021 0.2060
2024-25 Charlottetown Islanders QMJHL 27 2 2 4 0.148 0.0728 0.0689 0.3955 0.3744
2025-26 NAHL 55 7 14 21 0.382 0.1403 0.1315 0.4030 0.3777
Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

22%
NCAA D1
10%
NCAA D2/D3
45%
Age-Out / Club
18%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#15130
Defenseman overall
#2878
Defenseman born in 2005

D1 Comparables

QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ RIT (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

Williams Alumni similar profiles who attended this school

0.50
actual FR PPG at Williams
0.36
actual FR PPG at Williams
0.21
actual FR PPG at Williams
0.38
actual FR PPG at Williams

D2/3 Comparables

Manhattanville · 2018-19
0.312 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Wilkes · 2017-18
0.706 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Adrian · 2015-16
0.379 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.