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

Jason Kenyon Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1980-04-17 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
2000-01 Camrose Kodiaks AJHL 57 15 33 48 0.842 0.2824 0.2588 0.7793 0.7143
■ 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
2004-05 Manhattanville D3 UCHC SR 26 9 15 24 0.923
2003-04 Manhattanville D3 UCHC JR 14 4 9 13 0.929
2002-03 Manhattanville D3 UCHC SO 22 7 8 15 0.682
2001-02 Manhattanville D3 UCHC FR 24 10 16 26 1.083
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.22
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.08
2001-02 · Manhattanville
+389.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#18199
Forward overall
#389
Forward born in 1980
#382
in AJHL

D1 Comparables

Emil Romig
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Denver (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jonathan Davis
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.03 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sean Gaffney
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.14 PPG
→ UConn (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Toon De Schepper
Wilkes · 2018-19
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Evan Brown
Skidmore · 2023-24
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Teddy Purcell
SUNY Geneseo · 2005-06
0.550 Average
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.