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

John Kelly Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1989-07-02 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
2009-10 Texas Tornado NAHL 28 0 7 7 0.250 0.0990 0.0936 0.2625 0.2481
■ 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
2013-14 Western New England D3 CNE SR 21 1 16 17 0.809
2012-13 Western New England D3 CNE JR 25 7 12 19 0.760
2011-12 Western New England D3 CNE SO 22 6 14 20 0.909
2010-11 Western New England D3 CNE FR 26 10 14 24 0.923
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.92
2010-11 · Western New England
+1052.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#46853
Forward overall
#1557
Forward born in 1989
#5353
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kyle Pichler
Castleton · 2009-10
0.350 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kegan Couture
Gustavus Adolphus · 2015-16
0.154 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Gagné
Neumann · 2011-12
0.292 Developing
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.