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

Jacob Napier Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-03-31 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
2020-21 Aberdeen Wings NAHL 2 0 1 1 0.500 0.1981 0.1981 0.5250 0.5250
2021-22 Muskegon Lumberjacks USHL 58 1 9 10 0.172 0.1060 0.1058 0.5079 0.5068
2022-23 Fargo Force USHL 61 7 15 22 0.361 0.2217 0.2097 1.0627 1.0051
■ 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
2025-26 Colgate D1 ECAC JR 35 3 8 11 0.314
2024-25 Colgate D1 ECAC — 27 2 2 4 0.148
2023-24 Western Michigan D1 NCHC — 6 0 1 1 0.167
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.17
2023-24 · Western Michigan
+5.0% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

62%
NCAA D1
10%
NCAA D2/D3
22%
Age-Out / Club
5%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#8479
Defenseman overall
#1943
Defenseman born in 2003

D1 Comparables

Victor Björkung
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Vinny Muto
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ Niagara (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Johnny Hrabovsky
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Max Everson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Harvard (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Jared Kolquist
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jacob Kaminski
UMass Boston · 2021-22
0.400 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
John McLean
Salve Regina · 2015-16
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brent Wold
Utica · 2012-13
1.000 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.