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

Jake Roeper Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-01-10 Country: USA
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
2012-13 Cleveland Jr. Lumberjacks NA3HL 44 1 10 11 0.250 0.0301 0.0300 0.0790 0.0789
2013-14 — CCHL 49 5 9 14 0.286 0.0815 0.0774 0.2212 0.2100
■ 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
2017-18 Lawrence D3 NCHA SR 26 1 3 4 0.154
2016-17 Lawrence D3 NCHA JR 14 0 2 2 0.143
2015-16 Lawrence D3 NCHA SO 21 0 2 2 0.095
2014-15 Lawrence D3 NCHA FR 2 1 2 3 1.500
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.50
2014-15 · Lawrence
+2900.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#48949
Forward overall
#2094
Forward born in 1994

D1 Comparables

Nick DeCenzo
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ Army (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Dau
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Air Force (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Stanislav Dzakhov
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Niagara (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Eric Tetzlaff
Curry · 2003-04
0.429 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Justin Dauphinais
Wisconsin-Superior · 2021-22
0.263 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Ben Beaudoin
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2006-07
0.630 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.