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

Jordan Smith Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1985-11-04 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 Soo Greyhounds OHL 19 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2002-03 Soo Greyhounds OHL 60 2 8 10 0.167 0.0967 0.1043 0.4272 0.4609
2003-04 Soo Greyhounds OHL 68 6 20 26 0.382 0.2219 0.2274 0.9799 1.0043
2004-05 Soo Greyhounds OHL 64 5 27 32 0.500 0.2902 0.2823 1.2812 1.2464
■ 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 Utica D3 — FR 7 0 1 1 0.143
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.25
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.14
2009-10 · Utica
-41.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#5376
Defenseman overall
#776
Defenseman born in 1985
#1408
in OHL

D1 Comparables

Nelson Armstrong
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Murray
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Hamline (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Dakota Mermis
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Denver (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Tommy Davis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Princeton (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Mike McKee
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nicolas Pigeon
Wisconsin-Stout · 2021-22
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Tanner Congdon
Bryn Athyn · 2015-16
0.857 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Rusty Masters
Elmira · 2004-05
0.962 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.