As some have already pointed out, quite a number of statistically questionable assumptions. For example, comparing point production from Juniors - where they were probably top line or at least top 6 - to Freshman year - where they may have been 4th line or a frequent scratch.
1) The best players go to the USHL - Already knew that.
2) The best league, USHL, produce the future players in college and pros in the US - Already knew that.
3) There is no such thing as late bloomers. It comes down to who outlast who throwing money at the prospect of playing D1/pro hockey. It is the law of attrition. That is why everyone calls it a marathon and why no one wants to accelerate the development of a hockey player. You have to milk the parents for every dime you can before they give up. The ones with vast resources will be the last ones standing - Already knew that.
4) If you are not at the USHL by 18 years old, hang them up and go to college. - Already knew that.
5) Prep schools are a waste of money. You don't get college degrees from these Prep schools. Why throw money at them when you can save the money for college.
It is very easy to understand people. Clue in and enjoy the ride while it lasts. My kid knows it is over if the USHL is not looking at him by age 17. You don't need to crunch numbers to understand this. Good luck to everyone on their journey.
The same holds true for nepotism in hockey. Look at all the coach's sons playing in the USHL from around New England.