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

Zach Saar Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-06-22 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 Chicago Steel USHL 32 4 6 10 0.312 0.1990 0.2098 0.9365 0.9874
2011-12 — USHL 55 14 11 25 0.455 0.2894 0.2916 1.3620 1.3724
2012-13 — USHL 51 6 11 17 0.333 0.2122 0.2025 0.9988 0.9533
■ 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
2016-17 Penn State D1 BigTen SR 18 4 4 8 0.444
2015-16 Penn State D1 BigTen JR 25 6 3 9 0.360
2014-15 Penn State D1 BigTen SO 16 0 1 1 0.062
2013-14 Penn State D1 BigTen FR 33 5 6 11 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.20
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2013-14 · Penn State
+63.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#16318
Forward overall
#617
Forward born in 1993
#2409
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG
Robin Höglund
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Alfred Larsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tanner Pond
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tyler Spezia
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Chris Berry
Wisconsin-Superior · 2004-05
1.111 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Galati
SUNY Oswego · 2011-12
1.241 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Travis Quigley
Southern New Hampshire · 2016-17
0.333 Developing
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.