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

Connor Jensen Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-05-05 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
2022-23 Winkler Flyers MJHL 48 2 13 15 0.312 0.0602 0.0620 0.1969 0.2029
2023-24 Winkler Flyers MJHL 51 0 32 32 0.627 0.1208 0.1182 0.3955 0.3868
2024-25 Winkler Flyers MJHL 39 2 29 31 0.795 0.1530 0.1412 0.5009 0.4624
■ 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
2025-26 St. Olaf D3 MIAC — 20 1 6 7 0.350
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.35
2025-26 · St. Olaf
+180.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

22%
NCAA D1
18%
NCAA D2/D3
57%
Age-Out / Club
2%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#8659
Defenseman overall
#1971
Defenseman born in 2004
#569
in MJHL

D1 Comparables

Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Chris Carroll
Utica · 2021-22
0.429 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Bistodeau
Hobart · 2014-15
0.462 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Riley Ott
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2021-22
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.