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

Jesse Farabee Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-05-21 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
2015-16 New Jersey Jr. Titans NAHL 60 17 23 40 0.667 0.2475 0.2455 0.7059 0.7002
2016-17 Minnesota Wilderness NAHL 46 15 19 34 0.739 0.2744 0.2573 0.7826 0.7338
■ 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 Canton D3 — SR 15 6 4 10 0.667
2019-20 Canton D3 — JR 25 15 13 28 1.120
2017-18 SUNY Oswego D3 — FR 5 0 1 1 0.200
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.22
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.20
2017-18 · SUNY Oswego
-7.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#15825
Forward overall
#641
Forward born in 1996
#1207
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Clint Carlisle
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.78 PPG
→ Army (0.52 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Average
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bradley Duwe
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Justin Parizek
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Vadim Vasjonkin
Buffalo State · 2016-17
0.889 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Nathan Garnier
SUNY Cortland · 2023-24
0.696 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Leimbrock
SUNY Oswego · 2008-09
0.517 Average
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.