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

Josh Merson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1984-07-02 Country: USA
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 Pembroke Lumber Kings CCHL 50 4 23 27 0.540 0.1171 0.1180 0.4178 0.4211
■ 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
2008-09 Utica D3 UCHC SR 26 2 6 8 0.308
2007-08 Utica D3 UCHC JR 26 0 6 6 0.231
2006-07 Utica D3 UCHC SO 25 4 3 7 0.280
2005-06 Utica D3 UCHC FR 26 4 9 13 0.500
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.50
2005-06 · Utica
+348.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#8807
Defenseman overall
#945
Defenseman born in 1984
#751
in CCHL

D1 Comparables

Doyle Somerby
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Boston University (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Jimmy Mazza
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Canisius (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Jake Bischoff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.17 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Cutler Martin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Michigan (0.47 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Chris Leibinger
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jon Gaffney
Utica · 2006-07
0.920 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Kieran Chung
St. Scholastica · 2022-23
0.444 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Neal Sheehan
Fredonia · 2001-02
0.957 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.