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

Jonathan Schultz Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1981-02-05 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 Battlefords North Stars SJHL 62 22 33 55 0.887 0.2563 0.2492 0.6678 0.6494
2001-02 Battlefords North Stars SJHL 62 31 71 102 1.645 0.4753 0.4392 1.2385 1.1444
■ 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
2005-06 St. Norbert D3 — SR 10 2 6 8 0.800
2004-05 St. Norbert D3 — JR 28 10 17 27 0.964
2003-04 St. Norbert D3 — SO 22 5 14 19 0.864
2002-03 St. Norbert D3 — FR 16 5 13 18 1.125
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.31
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.12
2002-03 · St. Norbert
+261.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#5943
Forward overall
#258
Forward born in 1981
#21
in SJHL

D1 Comparables

Dylan Walchuk
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Average
NCAAe PPG
Trevor Mingoia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Union (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.51 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Carlos Amestoy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.40 No data
NCAAe PPG
Perry D'Arrisso
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.02 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG

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
Matt Carlson
Wilkes · 2021-22
0.840 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.