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

Jordan Cyr Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1986-05-12 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
2003-04 Aurora Tigers OJHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2004-05 Selkirk Steelers MJHL 56 23 33 56 1.000 0.2719 0.2798 0.6302 0.6484
2005-06 Brockville Braves CCHL 45 21 31 52 1.156 0.3690 0.3553 0.8945 0.8613
■ 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
2009-10 Holy Cross D1 AHA JR 29 14 16 30 1.034
2008-09 Holy Cross D1 AHA SO 37 19 13 32 0.865
2006-07 RPI D1 — FR 11 1 0 1 0.091
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.28
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.09
2006-07 · RPI
-67.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#13178
Forward overall
#452
Forward born in 1986

D1 Comparables

Tyler Heinonen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jared Linnell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.72 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Robbie Payne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.12 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ben Foster
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.60 PPG
→ Princeton (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cameron Brown
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Maine (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Matt Williams
Marian · 2007-08
1.148 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Shane Baker
Skidmore · 2023-24
0.704 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Mike Fiume
Neumann · 2002-03
1.040 Elite
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.