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

John Peterson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-04-25 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
2014-15 Holy Family Catholic USHS-MN 25 32 34 66 2.640 0.3252 0.2949 0.6413 0.5815
2015-16 — NAHL 47 10 12 22 0.468 0.1663 0.1644 0.4915 0.4858
■ 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
2019-20 St. Thomas D3 — SR 25 8 12 20 0.800
2018-19 St. Thomas D3 — JR 25 4 16 20 0.800
2017-18 St. Thomas D3 — SO 25 6 7 13 0.520
2016-17 St. Thomas D3 — FR 5 0 1 1 0.200
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.20
2016-17 · St. Thomas
+7.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#8729
Forward overall
#374
Forward born in 1996

D1 Comparables

Matthew Hansen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.25 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tommy Schutt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
William Messa
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Northeastern
0.12 No data
NCAAe PPG
Ben Ostlie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Gage Hough
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Adam Martinez
SUNY Potsdam · 2006-07
0.476 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Noah Bradley
Manhattanville · 2017-18
0.560 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Schreiner
St. Michael's College · 2018-19
0.654 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.