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

Josh Heidinger Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1985-05-24 Country: USA
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
2003-04 Bozeman Ice Dogs NAHL 52 18 11 29 0.558 0.2210 0.2270 0.5855 0.6014
2004-05 Bozeman Ice Dogs NAHL 44 14 33 47 1.068 0.4232 0.4136 1.1215 1.0961
2005-06 Bozeman Ice Dogs NAHL 53 33 56 89 1.679 0.6653 0.6173 1.7630 1.6357
■ 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
2009-10 Canisius D1 AHA SR 37 11 28 39 1.054
2008-09 Canisius D1 AHA JR 34 9 24 33 0.971
2007-08 Canisius D1 AHA SO 35 9 17 26 0.743
2006-07 Canisius D1 AHA FR 35 8 26 34 0.971
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.50
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.97
2006-07 · Canisius
+94.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#5775
Forward overall
#190
Forward born in 1985
#36
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Eric Scheid
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.94 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Average
NCAAe PPG
Shane Sooth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Average
NCAAe PPG
Michael Huntebrinker
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.51 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Wahlin
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.33 PPG
→ UMass (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Mike Szmatula
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.21 PPG
→ Northeastern (1.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Elite
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Scott Hudson
Manhattanville · 2008-09
1.231 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrew Rozak
SUNY Oswego · 2000-01
1.100 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Resch
Manhattanville · 2001-02
1.154 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.