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

Will Vosejpka Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-07-02 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
2012-13 Wichita Falls Wildcats NAHL 55 8 20 28 0.509 0.1890 0.1974 0.5390 0.5630
2013-14 Wichita Falls Wildcats NAHL 60 19 19 38 0.633 0.2351 0.2338 0.6705 0.6667
■ 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
2017-18 Amherst D3 NESCAC GR 25 1 1 2 0.080
2016-17 Amherst D3 NESCAC SR 22 5 4 9 0.409
2015-16 Amherst D3 NESCAC JR 27 6 3 9 0.333
2014-15 Air Force D1 — — 22 0 2 2 0.091
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.09
2014-15 · Air Force
-51.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#18258
Forward overall
#743
Forward born in 1994
#1595
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alfred Larsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG
Robin Höglund
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Tanner Pond
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Steve Schroeder
Norwich · 2007-08
0.742 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Ty Kraus
Northland · 2014-15
0.760 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Trent Cassan
SUNY Geneseo · 2002-03
0.821 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.