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

Jordan Boucher Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-02-21 Country: Canada
Signed Professionally
Grizzlys Wolfsburg · DEL

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 Sioux City Musketeers USHL 49 7 15 22 0.449 0.2649 0.2758 1.3485 1.4039
2012-13 Sioux City Musketeers USHL 13 1 2 3 0.231 0.1361 0.1344 0.6932 0.6848
2018-19 Örebro HK SHL 52 6 16 22 0.423 1.0577 1.1282 5.5209 5.8891
2019-20 Örebro HK SHL 40 4 7 11 0.275 0.6875 0.6875 3.5884 3.5884
2020-21 Grizzlys Wolfsburg DEL 25 4 4 8 0.320 0.8000 0.8000 2.7130 2.7130
■ 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
2016-17 Clarkson D1 ECAC SR 30 10 16 26 0.867
2015-16 Clarkson D1 ECAC JR 27 8 15 23 0.852
2014-15 Clarkson D1 ECAC SO 25 6 6 12 0.480
2013-14 Clarkson D1 ECAC FR 25 3 4 7 0.280
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.28
2013-14 · Clarkson
+71.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 29 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

#3815
Forward overall
#203
Forward born in 1994

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.