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

Jared Spooner Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-03-22 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
2013-14 Bismarck Bobcats NAHL 4 0 1 1 0.250 0.0919 0.0993 0.2639 0.2851
2014-15 Bismarck Bobcats NAHL 58 9 34 43 0.741 0.2724 0.2800 0.7825 0.8044
2015-16 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 55 6 11 17 0.309 0.1823 0.1731 0.9284 0.8815
2016-17 Green Bay Gamblers USHL 56 19 27 46 0.821 0.4845 0.4353 2.4670 2.2166
■ 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
2020-21 Minnesota State D1 WCHA SR 23 3 4 7 0.304
2019-20 Minnesota State D1 WCHA JR 31 9 10 19 0.613
2018-19 Minnesota State D1 WCHA SO 41 7 20 27 0.658
2017-18 Minnesota State D1 WCHA FR 40 4 15 19 0.475
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.28
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.47
2017-18 · Minnesota State
+68.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#11627
Forward overall
#473
Forward born in 1996

D1 Comparables

Carlos Amestoy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.39 No data
NCAAe PPG
Todd Skirving
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ RIT (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Shane Sooth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Average
NCAAe PPG
David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG
Eric Scheid
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.94 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Cole Hepler
Lebanon Valley · 2015-16
1.280 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Lucas Signoretti
Buffalo State · 2024-25
1.120 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Jon Whitelaw
SUNY Oswego · 2008-09
1.357 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.