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

Jason Usher Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1984-04-28 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 Fairbanks Ice Dogs NAHL 52 4 14 18 0.346 0.1285 0.1251 0.3666 0.3569
■ 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
2007-08 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 — SR 23 0 11 11 0.478
2006-07 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 — JR 13 1 2 3 0.231
2005-06 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 — SO 19 1 5 6 0.316
2004-05 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 — FR 28 3 12 15 0.536
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.54
2004-05 · Wisconsin-River Falls
+353.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#8956
Defenseman overall
#1059
Defenseman born in 1984
#3865
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Dan Molenaar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Nick
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ Army (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Johnny Hrabovsky
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Cameron McDonald
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.11 PPG
→ Providence (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average D
NCAAe PPG
James Roll
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Joe Kleven
Wisconsin-Stout · 2014-15
0.414 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Dennis Sicard
Buffalo State · 2004-05
0.643 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Joseph Miller
Fitchburg State · 2014-15
0.333 Developing
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.