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

Zach Homer Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2005-06-15 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
2022-23 Oklahoma Warriors NAHL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2023-24 — NAHL 50 6 15 21 0.420 0.1543 0.1623 0.4439 0.4670
2024-25 Minnesota Wilderness NAHL 58 22 20 42 0.724 0.2660 0.2659 0.7653 0.7650
2025-26 Minnesota Wilderness NAHL 57 39 27 66 1.158 0.4254 0.4043 1.2238 1.1631
■ 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
2026-27 Canisius D1 AHA FR 0 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

45%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
20%
Age-Out / Club
32%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#12893
Forward overall
#619
Forward born in 2005
#482
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

T.J. Sarcona
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.06 PPG
→ Niagara (0.58 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Wahlin
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.33 PPG
→ UMass (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Justin Parizek
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.93 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Michael Huntebrinker
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.49 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Todd Skirving
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ RIT (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brady Fleurent
University of New England · 2014-15
1.074 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Aaron Herdt
Concordia · 2015-16
1.273 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Matt Galati
SUNY Oswego · 2012-13
1.241 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.