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

Jack Scannell Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-09-06 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 Bay State Breakers USPHL-Elite 2 0 1 1 0.500 0.0372 0.0391 0.1145 0.1203
■ 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
2019-20 Stonehill D1 AHA SR 29 2 5 7 0.241
2019-20 Stonehill D2 NE10 SR 29 2 5 7 0.241
2018-19 Stonehill D1 AHA JR 26 5 3 8 0.308
2018-19 Stonehill D2 NE10 JR 26 5 3 8 0.308
2017-18 Stonehill D2 NE10 SO 23 4 4 8 0.348
2016-17 Stonehill D2 NE10 FR 22 2 3 5 0.227
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.03
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.23
2016-17 · Stonehill
+578.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Ryan Fitzgerald
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.12 PPG
→ Boston College (0.72 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Cédric Lacroix
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.13 PPG
→ Maine (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ian Mansfield
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Army (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jason Ford
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Gage Torrel
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brandon Longley
St. Norbert · 2002-03
0.312 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Tanner Skaja
Wisconsin-Superior · 2013-14
0.240 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Colin Hoey
Elmira · 2006-07
0.174 Developing
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.