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

Jacob Farabee Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-01-16 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
2014-15 Syracuse Jr. Stars USPHL-Elite 44 14 43 57 1.296 0.0965 0.0887 0.2968 0.2727
■ 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
2018-19 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC SR 0 0 0 0 0.000
2017-18 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC JR 18 1 6 7 0.389
2016-17 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC SO 13 2 3 5 0.385
2015-16 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC FR 9 1 0 1 0.111
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.11
2015-16 · Connecticut College
+46.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#24058
Forward overall
#937
Forward born in 1994
#54
in USPHL-Elite

D1 Comparables

Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Andrew McCann
SUNY Cortland · 2017-18
0.680 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Max Dronen
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2023-24
0.435 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Sean Muller
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2011-12
0.000 No data
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.