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

John Scott

Position: Defense DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin Country: ?
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
2022-23 Duluth Denfeld USHS-MN 27 14 9 23 0.852 0.1079 0.1079 0.2069 0.2069
2023-24 Duluth Denfeld USHS-MN 18 20 14 34 1.889 0.2391 0.2391 0.4588 0.4588
2024-25 Duluth Denfeld USHS-MN 26 26 24 50 1.923 0.2435 0.2435 0.4671 0.4671
■ 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
2005-06 Michigan Tech D1 CCHA SR 24 3 2 5 0.208
2004-05 Michigan Tech D1 CCHA JR 36 2 4 6 0.167
2003-04 Michigan Tech D1 CCHA SO 35 1 3 4 0.114
2002-03 Michigan Tech D1 CCHA FR 31 1 3 4 0.129

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

25%
NCAA D2/D3
2%
Club / ACHA
45%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#1480
Defenseman overall
#141
in USHS-MN

D1 Comparables

Michael Kapla
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.49 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Ruslan Pedan
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Gustav Olofsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Kyle Mackey
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Air Force (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Cutler Martin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Michigan (0.47 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Josh Jacobs
Neumann · 2003-04
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
C.J. Shugart
Williams · 2012-13
0.591 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Mac Balson
Buffalo State · 2009-10
0.560 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.