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

Joseph Rothwell Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1985-01-23 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
2002-03 Markham Waxers OJHL 49 2 13 15 0.306 0.0750 0.0766 0.2095 0.2140
2003-04 Markham Waxers OJHL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
■ 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
2007-08 Colby D3 — SR 25 5 12 17 0.680
2006-07 Colby D3 — JR 25 9 19 28 1.120
2005-06 Colby D3 — SO 23 8 9 17 0.739
2004-05 Colby D3 — FR 25 5 18 23 0.920
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.07
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.92
2004-05 · Colby
+1172.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#18328
Defenseman overall
#1492
Defenseman born in 1985
#3595
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Alex Smith
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.47 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Alec McCrea
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Cornell (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
David Drake
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ UConn (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Clint Lewis
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Cornell (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Steven Santini
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Boston College (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Chris Wood
Hamline · 2004-05
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
John Gutt
Utica · 2018-19
0.214 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Cody Ganchar
Milwaukee School of Engineering · 2008-09
0.862 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.