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

Jordan Schmaltz Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1993-10-08 Country: USA
2012 · Round 1, Pick #25  ·  St. Louis Blues St. Louis Blues
Signed Professionally
HIFK · Liiga

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
2009-10 U.S. National U17 Team NTDP-U18 11 2 0 2 0.182 0.1351 0.1409 0.6784 0.7078
2010-11 Sioux City Musketeers USHL 53 13 31 44 0.830 0.4897 0.5236 2.4934 2.6658
2011-12 — USHL 55 10 31 41 0.746 0.4398 0.4497 2.2390 2.2893
2021-22 HIFK Liiga 55 9 24 33 0.600 1.5000 1.2947 5.1577 4.4519
■ 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
2014-15 North Dakota D1 NCHC JR 42 4 24 28 0.667
2013-14 North Dakota D1 NCHC SO 41 6 18 24 0.585
2012-13 North Dakota D1 WCHA-orig FR 42 3 9 12 0.286
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.45
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.29
2012-13 · North Dakota
-36.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 27 comparables)

🏒 NHL / Pro Track — production profile is consistent with players who bypassed or minimized college hockey
0%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
100%
NHL / Pro

NCAAe Rankings

#283
Defenseman overall
#100
Defenseman born in 1993

D2/3 Comparables

Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Osmundson
Utica · 2018-19
1.448 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.