Zach Osburn Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1997-02-07 Country: USA

Set Commitment

School

Type

Date (optional)

Detected conference: () — projections will update automatically.

Notes (optional)

Projecting as:

Show:

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
2013-14	Indiana Ice	USHL	4	0	1	1	0.250	0.1475	0.1607	0.7509	0.8179
2014-15	Chicago Steel	USHL	54	8	8	16	0.296	0.1748	0.1818	0.8899	0.9255
2024-25	Iserlohn Roosters	DEL	48	5	21	26	0.542	1.3542	1.4143	4.5926	4.7965

■ 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
2018-19	Michigan State	D1	BigTen	SR	36	3	11	14	0.389
2017-18	Michigan State	D1	BigTen	JR	33	4	5	9	0.273
2016-17	Michigan State	D1	BigTen	SO	35	4	8	12	0.343
2015-16	Michigan State	D1	BigTen	FR	37	6	13	19	0.513

Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year

Projected PPG

0.16

before college

→

Actual FR PPG

0.51

2015-16 · Michigan State

+213.7% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

🏒 NHL / Pro Track — production profile is consistent with players who bypassed or minimized college hockey

NCAA D1

NCAA D2/D3

100%

NHL / Pro

NCAAe Rankings

#1636

Defenseman overall

#375

Defenseman born in 1997

D2/3 Comparables

Neil Trimm

Neumann · 2003-04

1.800 Elite

actual D2/3 PPG

Arkhip Ledenkov

St. Scholastica · 2018-19

1.636 Elite

actual D2/3 PPG

Brandon Osmundson

Utica · 2018-19

1.448 Elite

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.