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

Jordan Mish Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-05-29 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
2016-17 Melville Millionaires SJHL 12 0 1 1 0.083 0.0213 0.0232 0.0628 0.0683
2017-18 — SJHL 35 1 7 8 0.229 0.0586 0.0611 0.1723 0.1796
2018-19 La Ronge Ice Wolves SJHL 52 15 28 43 0.827 0.2119 0.2099 0.6233 0.6174
2019-20 La Ronge Ice Wolves SJHL 57 12 29 41 0.719 0.1843 0.1843 0.5422 0.5422
■ 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
2020-21 St. Norbert D3 NCHA — 0 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

42%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
12%
Age-Out / Club
40%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#29085
Forward overall
#1517
Forward born in 1999
#540
in SJHL

D1 Comparables

Tanner Pond
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alfred Larsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Average
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tommy Schutt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Caleb Suderman
Concordia · 2008-09
0.630 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Malcolm Arseneau
Fredonia · 2017-18
0.818 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Don Olivieri
Utica · 2010-11
0.815 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.