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

Josh Healey Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1994-07-12 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
2010-11 Sherwood Park Crusaders AJHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2011-12 Sherwood Park Crusaders AJHL 47 2 10 12 0.255 0.0856 0.0927 0.2363 0.2559
2012-13 Sherwood Park Crusaders AJHL 53 10 13 23 0.434 0.1456 0.1502 0.4016 0.4144
■ 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
2016-17 Ohio State D1 BigTen SR 35 4 21 25 0.714
2015-16 Ohio State D1 BigTen JR 33 5 16 21 0.636
2014-15 Ohio State D1 BigTen SO 32 2 7 9 0.281
2013-14 Ohio State D1 BigTen FR 33 1 4 5 0.151
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.15
2013-14 · Ohio State
+26.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#14322
Defenseman overall
#1719
Defenseman born in 1994
#1676
in AJHL

D1 Comparables

Cutler Martin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Michigan (0.47 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Doyle Somerby
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Boston University (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Jimmy Mazza
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Canisius (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Jake Bischoff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Chris Leibinger
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Deiter Stange
Worcester State · 2017-18
0.462 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Travis Fernley
Fredonia · 2010-11
0.524 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Edgar
Buffalo State · 2016-17
0.300 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.