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

Jamie Wright Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1983-05-01 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
2001-02 Lindsay Muskies OJHL 44 8 21 29 0.659 0.1615 0.1577 0.4512 0.4406
2002-03 Markham Waxers OJHL 47 10 29 39 0.830 0.2034 0.1902 0.5680 0.5311
2003-04 — OJHL 36 3 17 20 0.556 0.1362 0.1212 0.3803 0.3385
■ 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
2004-05 SUNY Plattsburgh D3 — FR 19 2 4 6 0.316
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.32
2004-05 · SUNY Plattsburgh
+124.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6629
Defenseman overall
#807
Defenseman born in 1983
#1422
in OJHL

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

Jack Brennan
New England College · 2024-25
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ross Mandigo
Trinity · 2014-15
0.321 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Bradley Pung
St. Norbert · 2014-15
0.567 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.