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

Jordan Stejskal Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1993-10-16 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 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 46 0 17 17 0.370 0.1358 0.1370 0.3901 0.3936
2013-14 — NAHL 56 2 7 9 0.161 0.0590 0.0566 0.1696 0.1626
■ 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 Wisconsin-Stout D3 BigTen SR 26 1 2 3 0.115
2016-17 Wisconsin-Stout D3 BigTen JR 26 1 4 5 0.192
2015-16 Wisconsin-Stout D3 BigTen SO 29 1 5 6 0.207
2014-15 Wisconsin-Stout D3 BigTen FR 26 2 5 7 0.269
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.27
2014-15 · Wisconsin-Stout
+221.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#17229
Defenseman overall
#1752
Defenseman born in 1993
#5328
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Kyle McKenzie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Providence (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Taki Pantziris
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Brown
0.15 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nicolas Roussel
Wentworth · 2021-22
0.364 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kaleigh Schrock
Neumann · 2004-05
0.364 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Griffiths
Saint Mary's (MN) · 2009-10
0.200 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.