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

Joshua Orrico Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-06-15 Country: Canada
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
2020-21 Islanders Hockey Club NCDC 10 0 1 1 0.100 0.0408 0.0408 0.0804 0.0804
2021-22 — BCHL 54 4 12 16 0.296 0.1142 0.1173 0.4312 0.4430
2022-23 Janesville Jets NAHL 43 2 13 15 0.349 0.1281 0.1281 0.3682 0.3681
■ 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 Michigan D1 BigTen — 8 0 0 0 0.000
2023-24 Michigan D1 BigTen — 7 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

38%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
28%
Age-Out / Club
30%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#15190
Defenseman overall
#2841
Defenseman born in 2003

D1 Comparables

James Roll
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Dan Molenaar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Tucker Poolman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Christopher Dienes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Cameron McDonald
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.11 PPG
→ Providence (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kim Hilmersson
Plymouth State · 2023-24
0.852 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Roethke
Concordia · 2023-24
0.429 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Oliver Flynn
Amherst · 2022-23
1.059 Elite
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.