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

Joel Langevin Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1988-09-08 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
2007-08 Weyburn Red Wings SJHL 26 5 9 14 0.538 0.1380 0.1381 0.4059 0.4063
■ 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
2012-13 St. Scholastica D3 MIAC SR 2 0 0 0 0.000
2011-12 St. Scholastica D3 MIAC JR 9 2 1 3 0.333
2010-11 St. Scholastica D3 MIAC SO 11 3 1 4 0.364
2009-10 St. Scholastica D3 MIAC FR 16 2 3 5 0.312
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.31
2009-10 · St. Scholastica
+164.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#34410
Forward overall
#1152
Forward born in 1988
#762
in SJHL

D1 Comparables

Conor Andrle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Army (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Average
NCAAe PPG
Josh Erickson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Landon Smith
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.79 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jake Wood
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ RPI (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Hynes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Union (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Niko Benjamin
Norwich · 2023-24
0.586 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kevin Paganini
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2018-19
0.625 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Nolan Craner
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2005-06
0.741 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.