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

Zeke Zeier Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1998-12-08 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
2017-18 Amarillo Wranglers NAHL 43 3 2 5 0.116 0.0427 0.0434 0.1228 0.1247
2018-19 Amarillo Wranglers NAHL 17 3 1 4 0.235 0.0864 0.0839 0.2484 0.2412
■ 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 Bethel D1 MIAC FR 14 2 1 3 0.214
2019-20 Bethel D3 MIAC — 14 2 1 3 0.214
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.21
2019-20 · Bethel
+269.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

35%
NCAA D1
25%
NCAA D2/D3
35%
Age-Out / Club
5%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#52347
Forward overall
#2893
Forward born in 1998
#6020
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Tayler Munson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Alexander Dahl
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Stanislav Dzakhov
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Niagara (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Average
NCAAe PPG
Ben Ostlie
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Notre Dame
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Connor Bradshaw
St. Norbert · 2011-12
0.364 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Braden Brown
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2016-17
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Joey Sardina
Lake Forest · 2016-17
0.593 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.