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

Jonny Hill Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1998-10-09 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
2015-16 Haliburton County Huskies OJHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2016-17 Brockville Braves CCHL 59 0 9 9 0.152 0.0331 0.0344 0.1168 0.1214
2017-18 Brockville Braves CCHL 62 19 34 53 0.855 0.1854 0.1832 0.6548 0.6469
■ 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
2021-22 Niagara D1 AHA — 36 2 6 8 0.222
2020-21 Niagara D1 AHA — 12 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 Niagara D1 AHA — 18 4 0 4 0.222
2018-19 Niagara D1 AHA — 28 1 1 2 0.071
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.07
2018-19 · Niagara
-38.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

28%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
68%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#8247
Defenseman overall
#1606
Defenseman born in 1998

D1 Comparables

Tommy Davis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Princeton (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Christian Neumann
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ UConn (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Neal Goff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Eric Schurhamer
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Maine (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Joe Schuldt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Michigan Tech
0.05 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mitch Walinski
Salve Regina · 2017-18
0.692 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Dan Cecka
Wisconsin-Stout · 2008-09
0.556 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jake Simons
Endicott · 2015-16
1.000 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.