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

Josh Chamberlain Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1987-06-05 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
2003-04 Wellington Dukes OJHL 42 11 15 26 0.619 0.1859 0.2035 0.4237 0.4639
2004-05 Wellington Dukes OJHL 44 16 19 35 0.795 0.2390 0.2496 0.5445 0.5687
2005-06 Wellington Dukes OJHL 48 17 27 44 0.917 0.2754 0.2775 0.6275 0.6323
2006-07 Wellington Dukes OJHL 49 19 37 56 1.143 0.3433 0.3287 0.7823 0.7490
■ 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
2009-10 SUNY Oswego D3 — JR 1 0 0 0 0.000
2008-09 SUNY Oswego D3 — SO 13 3 8 11 0.846
2007-08 SUNY Oswego D3 — FR 6 2 0 2 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.26
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2007-08 · SUNY Oswego
+26.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#15895
Forward overall
#539
Forward born in 1987
#664
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Brett Skibba
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ UConn (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kevin Irwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.56 PPG
→ Vermont (0.47 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alfred Larsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tanner Pond
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Heinonen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Matthew Manning
Worcester State · 2015-16
0.750 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Flack
SUNY Oswego · 2018-19
0.895 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Shawn Hulshof
SUNY Oswego · 2012-13
0.870 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.