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

Eddie Eades Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1995-10-23 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
2014-15 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 52 2 5 7 0.135 0.0500 0.0504 0.1425 0.1435
2015-16 Steinbach Pistons MJHL 57 1 33 34 0.597 0.1687 0.1605 0.3759 0.3575
■ 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
2019-20 Concordia D3 MIAC SR 26 4 2 6 0.231
2018-19 Concordia D3 MIAC JR 25 1 8 9 0.360
2017-18 Concordia D3 MIAC SO 26 1 7 8 0.308
2016-17 Concordia D3 MIAC FR 27 1 7 8 0.296
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.30
2016-17 · Concordia
+169.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#9839
Defenseman overall
#1410
Defenseman born in 1995

D1 Comparables

Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Zink
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Garret Peterson
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.35 PPG
→ Army (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

David DuBord
St. Thomas · 2000-01
0.679 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Keenan McNeill
Fredonia · 2024-25
0.471 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan McIntyre
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2005-06
0.429 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.