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

Jeff Gumaer Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1984-12-03 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
2003-04 Springfield Jr. Blues NAHL 55 16 16 32 0.582 0.2305 0.2313 0.6108 0.6130
2004-05 Springfield Jr. Blues NAHL 56 26 20 46 0.821 0.3254 0.3104 0.8624 0.8225
■ 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 Bentley D1 — SR 38 17 20 37 0.974
2007-08 Bentley D1 — JR 30 11 7 18 0.600
2006-07 Bentley D1 — SO 34 18 15 33 0.971
2005-06 Bentley D1 — FR 37 16 8 24 0.649
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.24
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.65
2005-06 · Bentley
+171.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#17015
Forward overall
#498
Forward born in 1984
#943
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Joseph-Matthew Manno
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.63 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Gerald Mayhew
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.56 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Siiro
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Princeton (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Tyler Barrow
Wilkes · 2017-18
1.385 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Dayne Bihn
Neumann · 2003-04
1.200 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Kevin Van Bokkelen
Lebanon Valley · 2016-17
0.550 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.