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

Jack Stander Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1995-02-03 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 Sioux Falls Stampede USHL 6 0 2 2 0.333 0.2122 0.2197 0.9988 1.0341
2013-14 Sioux Falls Stampede USHL 49 1 6 7 0.143 0.0910 0.0900 0.4282 0.4233
■ 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 Canisius D1 AHA SR 37 3 7 10 0.270
2016-17 Canisius D1 AHA JR 39 0 4 4 0.103
2015-16 Canisius D1 AHA SO 37 1 10 11 0.297
2014-15 Canisius D1 AHA FR 24 2 2 4 0.167
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.17
2014-15 · Canisius
+24.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#13588
Defenseman overall
#1728
Defenseman born in 1995
#4004
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Sam Piazza
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Michigan (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Niklas Folin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Richard Buri
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.04 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.03 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Garret Cockerill
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Cliff Watson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Evan Hesse
Augsburg · 2011-12
0.577 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Glenn Wiswell
Castleton · 2014-15
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jacob Banks
UMass Boston · 2018-19
0.538 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.