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

Troy Josephs Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-05-09 Country: Canada
2013 · Round 7, Pick #209  ·  Pittsburgh Penguins Pittsburgh Penguins
Signed Professionally
KHL

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
2010-11 Pickering Panthers OJHL 7 4 1 5 0.714 0.1751 0.1940 0.4918 0.5450
2011-12 St. Michael's Buzzers OJHL 41 11 13 24 0.585 0.1435 0.1527 0.4030 0.4288
2012-13 St. Michael's Buzzers OJHL 42 17 20 37 0.881 0.2159 0.2190 0.6066 0.6152
2023-24 Lada Togliatti KHL 53 20 9 29 0.547 1.3680 1.1540 7.5397 6.3602
2024-25 — KHL 52 9 15 24 0.462 1.1538 0.9392 6.3589 5.1762
■ 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
2016-17 Clarkson D1 ECAC SR 37 20 13 33 0.892
2015-16 Clarkson D1 ECAC JR 28 5 7 12 0.429
2014-15 Clarkson D1 ECAC SO 36 3 14 17 0.472
2013-14 Clarkson D1 ECAC FR 33 2 3 5 0.151
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.16
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.15
2013-14 · Clarkson
-8.1% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

⭐ Elite profile — high probability of D1 placement; comparable to top-end prospects
12%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
88%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#1454
Forward overall
#94
Forward born in 1994

D2/3 Comparables

Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brandon Osmundson
Utica · 2018-19
1.448 Elite
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.