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

C.J. Smith Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1997-11-26 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
2016-17 — USPHL-Elite 32 8 18 26 0.812 0.0756 0.0762 0.1861 0.1875
2017-18 — NA3HL 49 18 41 59 1.204 0.1534 0.1464 0.3809 0.3635
■ 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
2020-21 Albertus Magnus D3 UCHC — 2 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 Albertus Magnus D3 UCHC — 17 1 2 3 0.176
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.10
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.18
2019-20 · Albertus Magnus
+74.2% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

20%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#25210
Forward overall
#1146
Forward born in 1997

D1 Comparables

Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Andrew Bechard
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2018-19
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Garrett Devine
University of New England · 2017-18
0.600 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
George Curry
Canton · 2011-12
0.467 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.