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

Joseph Giordano Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-01-29 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
2012-13 Bismarck Bobcats NAHL 60 13 31 44 0.733 0.2723 0.2514 0.7764 0.7169
■ 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
2016-17 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC SR 23 2 15 17 0.739
2015-16 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC JR 24 6 14 20 0.833
2014-15 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC SO 26 6 8 14 0.538
2013-14 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC FR 24 4 4 8 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.22
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2013-14 · Connecticut College
+54.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#12580
Forward overall
#551
Forward born in 1992
#754
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ricky DeRosa
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Penn State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Average
NCAAe PPG
Aidan Cavallini
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Perry D'Arrisso
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.02 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Gage Christianson
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2012-13
0.741 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan Bancroft
Concordia · 2011-12
0.846 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Glenn Wiswell
Castleton · 2016-17
0.667 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.