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

Adam Johnson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-06-22 Country: USA
Signed Professionally
Augsburger Panther · 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
2012-13 Indiana Ice USHL 6 0 2 2 0.333 0.1966 0.1975 1.0010 1.0054
2013-14 Sioux City Musketeers USHL 56 15 31 46 0.821 0.4845 0.4640 2.4670 2.3625
2014-15 Sioux City Musketeers USHL 59 31 40 71 1.203 0.7099 0.6449 3.6143 3.2834
2020-21 Malmö Redhawks SHL 21 7 5 12 0.571 1.4285 1.4285 7.4560 7.4560
2022-23 Augsburger Panther DEL 45 7 15 22 0.489 1.2223 1.2346 4.1450 4.1868
■ 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 Minnesota Duluth D1 NCHC SO 42 18 19 37 0.881
2015-16 Minnesota Duluth D1 NCHC FR 39 6 12 18 0.462
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.53
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.46
2015-16 · Minnesota Duluth
-13.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 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

#2055
Forward overall
#121
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.