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

Zahn Thompson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin 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
2010-11 Arctic Bears USHS-W 18 7 7 14 0.778 0.2339 0.2339 — —
2011-12 Arctic Bears USHS-W 17 15 5 20 1.177 0.3538 0.3538 — —
2012-13 Arctic Bears USHS-W 22 12 12 24 1.091 0.3280 0.3280 — —
■ 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
2015-16 St. Scholastica D3 NCHA SO 26 1 2 3 0.115
2014-15 St. Scholastica D3 NCHA FR 25 1 4 5 0.200
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.29
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.20
2014-15 · St. Scholastica
-30.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#2029
Forward overall
#715
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Lindsay Roethke
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.96 PPG
→ UConn (0.03 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Rebecca Lindblad
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 1.08 PPG
→ UConn (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Emily Bergland
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.04 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Catherine Skaja
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Rebekah Kolstad
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.09 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Megan Dulong
Wisconsin-Superior · 2014-15
0.407 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Courtney Moser
Saint Mary's (MN) · 2014-15
0.560 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Paige Hanson
Concordia · 2018-19
0.000 No data
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.