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

Randy Jones Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1981-07-23 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
2000-01 Cobourg Cougars OJHL 28 15 21 36 1.286 0.3862 0.3629 0.8801 0.8269
■ 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
2002-03 Clarkson D1 ECAC SO 33 13 20 33 1.000
2001-02 Clarkson D1 ECAC FR 34 9 11 20 0.588
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.34
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.59
2001-02 · Clarkson
+71.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#1872
Defenseman overall
#338
Defenseman born in 1981
#192
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Niklas Nevalainen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Mike McKee
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Murray
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Hamline (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Tucker Poolman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Christopher Dienes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Orrin Hergott
St. Norbert · 2001-02
0.839 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Vili-Jesper Koivula
Canton · 2014-15
1.400 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Jhuwon Davis
New England College · 2017-18
0.741 Strong
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.