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

Johnny Hrabovsky Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1993-03-19 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 Tri-City Storm USHL 56 0 10 10 0.179 0.1054 0.1048 0.5364 0.5335
2012-13 Tri-City Storm USHL 55 4 9 13 0.236 0.1395 0.1313 0.7100 0.6684
■ 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 Air Force D1 AHA SR 33 1 7 8 0.242
2015-16 Air Force D1 AHA JR 36 7 8 15 0.417
2014-15 Air Force D1 AHA SO 31 3 7 10 0.323
2013-14 Air Force D1 AHA FR 39 2 8 10 0.256
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.26
2013-14 · Air Force
+125.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#12897
Defenseman overall
#1478
Defenseman born in 1993
#3517
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Vinny Muto
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Niagara (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Aleksi Rossi
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ Brown
0.08 No data
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Parker
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Max Everson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Harvard (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Joseph Fiala
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Paul Allan Bamberg
Manhattanville · 2009-10
0.812 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Frankie DeAugustine
UMass Boston · 2010-11
0.926 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Derek Lynden
Manhattanville · 2004-05
0.529 Average
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.