← New Search ↗ Social Card

James Poston Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1991-03-15 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 29 2 4 6 0.207 0.0760 0.0783 0.2184 0.2249
2010-11 New Mexico Mustangs NAHL 52 4 16 20 0.385 0.1413 0.1383 0.4059 0.3974
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
2014-15 Concordia D3 MIAC GR 22 1 3 4 0.182
2014-15 Concordia (WI) D3 NCHA JR 22 1 3 4 0.182
2013-14 Concordia D3 MIAC SR 8 1 3 4 0.500
2013-14 Concordia (WI) D3 NCHA SO 8 1 3 4 0.500
2012-13 Concordia D3 MIAC JR 15 3 7 10 0.667
2012-13 Concordia (WI) D3 NCHA FR 15 3 7 10 0.667
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.10
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.67
2012-13 · Concordia
+581.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#41649
Forward overall
#1474
Forward born in 1991
#4479
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Niagara (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Northeastern
0.12 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Post · 2022-23
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Potsdam · 2009-10
0.809 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Canton · 2014-15
0.000 No data
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.