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

Josh Jacobs Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1985-09-07 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
2002-03 Thornhill Rattlers OJHL 47 9 21 30 0.638 0.1783 0.1877 0.4405 0.4637
2003-04 Markham Waxers OJHL 45 15 27 42 0.933 0.2608 0.2628 0.6441 0.6491
2004-05 Markham Waxers OJHL 48 14 23 37 0.771 0.2154 0.2062 0.5319 0.5092
■ 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
2006-07 Neumann D3 — SO 8 0 3 3 0.375
2005-06 Neumann D3 — FR 12 1 5 6 0.500
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.20
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.50
2005-06 · Neumann
+155.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#17647
Forward overall
#666
Forward born in 1985
#1223
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Zach Szajner
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Conor Lemirande
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Miami (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Erik Baskin
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ Air Force (0.66 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Conor Andrle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Army (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Average
NCAAe PPG
Jake Wood
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ RPI (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Scott Pulak
St. Norbert · 2006-07
0.548 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Adam Laite
New England · 2007-08
0.818 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Sean Melso
SUNY Geneseo · 2021-22
0.500 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.