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

Dakota Joshua Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-05-15 Country: USA
Signed Professionally

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 — USHL 7 3 0 3 0.429 0.2635 0.2897 1.2627 1.3880
2013-14 — USHL 55 17 21 38 0.691 0.4247 0.4470 2.0355 2.1424
2014-15 — USHL 52 20 24 44 0.846 0.5202 0.5219 2.4931 2.5015
■ 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
2018-19 Ohio State D1 BigTen SR 32 9 13 22 0.688
2017-18 Ohio State D1 BigTen JR 34 15 11 26 0.765
2016-17 Ohio State D1 BigTen SO 33 12 23 35 1.061
2015-16 Ohio State D1 BigTen FR 29 5 12 17 0.586
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.42
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.59
2015-16 · Ohio State
+39.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Sheldon Dries
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.56 Developing
NCAAe PPG
John Stevens
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.81 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.59 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Austin Ortega
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.56 Average
NCAAe PPG
Drew Smolcynski
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.69 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Average
NCAAe PPG
C.J. Suess
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.76 D1 FR PPG)
0.58 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nick Ford
Elmira · 2014-15
0.800 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Joseph Fiorino
Southern New Hampshire · 2016-17
0.593 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Rihards Marenis
Aurora · 2013-14
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.