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

Steve Zierke Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1990-04-18 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
2009-10 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 56 23 32 55 0.982 0.3647 0.3591 1.0398 1.0239
2010-11 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 56 26 32 58 1.036 0.3846 0.3591 — —
■ 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
2011-12 Wisconsin-River Falls D3 — FR 8 1 2 3 0.375
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.31
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.38
2011-12 · Wisconsin-River Falls
+22.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6292
Forward overall
#269
Forward born in 1990

D1 Comparables

Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Carlos Amestoy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.40 No data
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Justin Parizek
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG
David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Travis Broughman
SUNY Oswego · 2016-17
0.852 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Blake Tosto
Lebanon Valley · 2018-19
0.571 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Andy Willock
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2004-05
0.727 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.