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

Jachym Kondelik Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-12-21 Country: Czechia
2018 NHL Draft Round 4, Pick #111  ·  Nashville Predators Nashville Predators
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
2016-17 Muskegon Lumberjacks USHL 43 7 8 15 0.349 0.2058 0.2235 1.0276 1.1159
2017-18 Muskegon Lumberjacks USHL 44 16 18 34 0.773 0.4558 0.4723 2.2765 2.3589
■ 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
2021-22 UConn D1 HockeyEast — 36 12 21 33 0.917
2020-21 UConn D1 HockeyEast — 23 4 18 22 0.957
2019-20 UConn D1 HockeyEast — 34 8 15 23 0.676
2018-19 UConn D1 HockeyEast — 33 4 22 26 0.788
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.32
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.79
2018-19 · UConn
+146.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

90%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
10%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Tyler Kelleher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alex Roos
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Average
NCAAe PPG
Evan Allen
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.72 PPG
→ Michigan (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.51 Developing
NCAAe PPG
C.J. Smith
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.98 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.90 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Elite
NCAAe PPG
John Hayden
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Yale (0.48 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Joseph Fiorino
Southern New Hampshire · 2016-17
0.593 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Nick Ford
Elmira · 2014-15
0.800 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Reifler
Elmira · 2016-17
1.067 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.