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

Jordan Menke Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1989-12-17 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
2007-08 Yorkton Terriers SJHL 25 3 5 8 0.320 0.0975 0.1038 0.2372 0.2525
2008-09 Yorkton Terriers SJHL 56 15 23 38 0.679 0.2067 0.2097 0.5029 0.5103
2009-10 Yorkton Terriers SJHL 58 20 24 44 0.759 0.2311 0.2239 0.5622 0.5446
■ 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
2010-11 Wisconsin-Superior D3 — FR 14 0 4 4 0.286
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.29
2010-11 · Wisconsin-Superior
+52.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#29288
Forward overall
#957
Forward born in 1989
#696
in SJHL

D1 Comparables

Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Siiro
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Princeton (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average
NCAAe PPG
Joseph-Matthew Manno
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.63 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Chase Decker
Norwich · 2002-03
0.455 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Casale
Salem State · 2013-14
0.680 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Brendan Young
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2018-19
0.423 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.