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

J.T. Compher Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-04-08 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
2011-12 — NTDP-U18 58 23 32 55 0.948 0.7353 0.7531 3.5295 3.6148
2012-13 — NTDP-U18 52 18 32 50 0.962 0.7455 0.7246 3.5786 3.4780
■ 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
2015-16 Michigan D1 BigTen — 38 16 47 63 1.658
2014-15 Michigan D1 BigTen — 34 12 12 24 0.706
2013-14 Michigan D1 BigTen — 35 11 20 31 0.886
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.69
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.89
2013-14 · Michigan
+29.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3150
Forward overall
#185
Forward born in 1995

D1 Comparables

Trevor Moore
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.02 PPG
→ Denver (0.76 D1 FR PPG)
0.65 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Anthony Louis
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.04 PPG
→ Miami (0.69 D1 FR PPG)
0.66 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Vinni Lettieri
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.92 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.58 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Kelleher
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.65 Average
NCAAe PPG
Zach Diamantoni
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.63 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

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