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

Zeke Hume Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1983-07-29 Country: Canada
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
2001-02 Coquitlam Express BCHL 47 3 10 13 0.277 0.1066 0.1089 0.4025 0.4110
2002-03 Coquitlam Express BCHL 47 11 25 36 0.766 0.2951 0.2886 1.1148 1.0902
2003-04 Merritt Centennials BCHL 60 12 44 56 0.933 0.3596 0.3357 1.3582 1.2679
■ 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
2004-05 Manhattanville D3 UCHC FR 20 7 5 12 0.600
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.30
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.60
2004-05 · Manhattanville
+100.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3869
Defenseman overall
#597
Defenseman born in 1983
#868
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

Paul LaDue
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
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
Matt Van Voorhis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Denver (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Barrett Kaib
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Providence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Luke Nesper
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2007-08
0.889 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Patrick Saini
Adrian · 2023-24
0.759 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Scott McNulty
Western Connecticut · 2024-25
0.762 Strong
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.