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

Jesper Peltonen Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1998-06-08 Country: Finland
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
2017-18 Omaha Lancers USHL 56 4 5 9 0.161 0.0948 0.0910 0.4826 0.4630
■ 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 Wisconsin D1 BigTen SR 36 2 5 7 0.194
2020-21 Wisconsin D1 BigTen JR 30 0 7 7 0.233
2019-20 Wisconsin D1 BigTen SO 7 0 1 1 0.143
2018-19 Wisconsin D1 BigTen FR 13 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

38%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
60%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#17307
Defenseman overall
#2563
Defenseman born in 1998
#3835
in USHL

D1 Comparables

James Roll
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Dan Molenaar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Cameron McDonald
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.11 PPG
→ Providence (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Johnny Hrabovsky
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Aleksi Rossi
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ Brown
0.08 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Logan Isley
Wisconsin-Superior · 2005-06
0.815 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Davis Ross
Marian · 2014-15
0.786 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Coleman
Manhattanville · 2010-11
0.929 Strong
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.