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

Connor Jalbert Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2005-04-11 Country: USA
Army
AHA D1

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
2022-23 Northeast Generals NA3HL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2024-25 — NAHL 50 16 30 46 0.920 0.3380 0.3349 0.9711 0.9621
2025-26 — NAHL 31 5 31 36 1.161 0.4267 0.4017 1.2258 1.1541
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

42%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
20%
Age-Out / Club
35%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#9777
Forward overall
#412
Forward born in 2005

D1 Comparables

Carlos Amestoy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.39 No data
NCAAe PPG
Todd Skirving
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ RIT (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG
Shane Sooth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Average
NCAAe PPG

Army Alumni similar profiles who attended this school

Kevin Dineen
NAHL 2016-17
0.15
actual FR PPG at Army
Tucker DeYoung
USPHL-Premier-Classic 2016-17
0.38
actual FR PPG at Army
Jacob Ligi
NAHL 2024-25
0.00
actual FR PPG at Army
Lucas Kanta
NAHL 2021-22
0.24
actual FR PPG at Army

D2/3 Comparables

David Italiano
Williams · 2013-14
0.880 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Anders Grongstad
Worcester State · 2021-22
0.808 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Steve Evans
Westfield State · 2010-11
0.950 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.