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

Jake Linhart Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1996-01-17 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 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 58 1 6 7 0.121 0.0769 0.0833 0.3617 0.3917
2013-14 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 58 2 18 20 0.345 0.2196 0.2275 1.0333 1.0707
■ 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 Wisconsin D1 BigTen SR 37 1 12 13 0.351
2016-17 Wisconsin D1 BigTen JR 36 6 17 23 0.639
2015-16 Wisconsin D1 BigTen SO 35 8 10 18 0.514
2014-15 Wisconsin D1 BigTen FR 34 0 6 6 0.176
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.18
2014-15 · Wisconsin
+10.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6329
Defenseman overall
#1106
Defenseman born in 1996
#3296
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Clint Lewis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.30 PPG
→ Cornell (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Jack Stander
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Canisius (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Mark Auk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Clark Kuster
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ St. Cloud State
0.31 No data
NCAAe PPG
Matt Roy
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.30 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2000-01
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Justin Ross
Lake Forest · 2018-19
0.720 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Aiello
UMass Dartmouth · 2005-06
1.000 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.