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

Jack Smiley Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-07-15 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
2018-19 Corpus Christi IceRays NAHL 28 7 4 11 0.393 0.1444 0.1445 0.4147 0.4151
2019-20 — NAHL 47 7 4 11 0.234 0.0860 0.0860 0.2470 0.2470
■ 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
2024-25 Endicott D3 CNE — 1 0 0 0 0.000
2023-24 Endicott D3 CNE — 0 0 0 0 0.000
2021-22 Endicott D3 CNE — 3 0 0 0 0.000
2020-21 Endicott D1 CNE FR 1 0 0 0 0.000
2020-21 Endicott D3 CNE — 1 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

38%
NCAA D1
8%
NCAA D2/D3
25%
Age-Out / Club
30%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#42570
Forward overall
#2419
Forward born in 1999
#4638
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Josh Erickson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ben Greiner
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Spezia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Leo Avakovs
Albertus Magnus · 2017-18
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan Pennington
Marian · 2000-01
0.750 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Cole Workman
Finlandia · 2010-11
0.286 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.