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

Jim Ceglarek Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1985-07-01 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
2005-06 Northern Michigan Black Bears NOJHL 48 2 20 22 0.458 0.0653 0.0612 0.1901 0.1781
■ 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
2009-10 Becker D3 — SR 25 2 9 11 0.440
2008-09 Becker D3 — JR 26 2 9 11 0.423
2007-08 Becker D3 — SO 26 1 11 12 0.462
2006-07 Becker D3 — FR 19 3 5 8 0.421
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.42
2006-07 · Becker
+628.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#15615
Defenseman overall
#1376
Defenseman born in 1985
#927
in NOJHL

D1 Comparables

William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Luke Jordan
UMass Dartmouth · 2022-23
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Ethan Hendrickson
St. Michael's College · 2016-17
0.273 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Connor Kelly
Saint John's · 2014-15
0.400 Average
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.