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

Zachary Lazzaro Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1992-10-04 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
2011-12 Kenai River Brown Bears NAHL 59 8 19 27 0.458 0.1681 0.1694 0.4830 0.4867
2012-13 Kenai River Brown Bears NAHL 59 18 17 35 0.593 0.2179 0.2086 0.6261 0.5994
■ 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 Neumann D3 MAC — 27 5 7 12 0.444
2015-16 Neumann D3 MAC — 27 5 2 7 0.259
2014-15 Neumann D3 MAC — 26 5 5 10 0.385
2013-14 Utica D3 UCHC — 10 2 1 3 0.300
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.30
2013-14 · Utica
+64.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#5976
Defenseman overall
#967
Defenseman born in 1992
#2123
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Benjamin Gallacher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Matt Anastasio
SUNY Brockport · 2021-22
0.533 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Chris Santiago
Utica · 2009-10
0.769 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Payton Baldillez
Norwich · 2013-14
0.417 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.