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

Jimmy Schuldt Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1995-05-11 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 6 0 2 2 0.333 0.1966 0.2062 1.0010 1.0497
2013-14 — USHL 57 6 19 25 0.439 0.2587 0.2592 1.3173 1.3197
2014-15 — USHL 59 13 26 39 0.661 0.3899 0.3715 1.9852 1.8913
■ 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 St. Cloud State D1 NCHC SR 39 10 25 35 0.897
2017-18 St. Cloud State D1 NCHC JR 40 10 28 38 0.950
2016-17 St. Cloud State D1 NCHC SO 36 8 11 19 0.528
2015-16 St. Cloud State D1 NCHC FR 41 10 16 26 0.634
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.31
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.63
2015-16 · St. Cloud State
+105.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Niklas Nevalainen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Jared Kolquist
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Connor Murphy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Cornell (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Christopher Dienes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Tucker Poolman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mathew Thompson
Adrian · 2013-14
1.536 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Taylor McCloy
Adrian · 2013-14
1.500 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Donny Flynn
Wilkes · 2015-16
1.423 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.