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

Jared Fiegl Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-01-23 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
2012-13 U.S. National U17 Team NTDP-U18 56 8 9 17 0.304 0.2354 0.2381 1.1300 1.1431
2013-14 U.S. National U18 Team NTDP-U18 45 2 4 6 0.133 0.1034 0.0989 0.4961 0.4747
■ 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
2017-18 Cornell D1 ECAC SR 28 4 4 8 0.286
2016-17 Cornell D1 ECAC JR 35 2 4 6 0.171
2015-16 Cornell D1 ECAC SO 30 1 1 2 0.067
2014-15 Cornell D1 ECAC FR 26 1 0 1 0.038
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.04
2014-15 · Cornell
-70.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#54761
Forward overall
#2647
Forward born in 1996

D1 Comparables

Kyle Eastman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.19 PPG
→ Robert Morris (0.09 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jason Cotton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.13 PPG
→ Northeastern
0.08 No data
NCAAe PPG
Félix Caron
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ RPI (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Bryan Basilico
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.07 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bo Pieper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.19 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brad Peterson
Bethel · 2002-03
1.040 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
J.B. Baker
Nichols · 2012-13
1.482 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Couto
SUNY Potsdam · 2006-07
0.591 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.