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

Charlie Zuccarini Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1994-10-28 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 Trail Smoke Eaters BCHL 45 27 30 57 1.267 0.4881 0.4653 1.8434 1.7572
■ 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
2018-19 Trinity D1 NESCAC SR 20 1 3 4 0.200
2018-19 Trinity D3 NESCAC — 20 1 3 4 0.200
2017-18 Trinity D3 NESCAC — 26 2 6 8 0.308
2016-17 Trinity D3 NESCAC — 28 2 8 10 0.357
2015-16 Arizona State D1 NCHC — 8 2 0 2 0.250
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.40
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.25
2015-16 · Arizona State
-37.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6536
Forward overall
#318
Forward born in 1994
#79
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

Sean Gaffney
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.14 PPG
→ UConn (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jared VanWormer
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.27 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Developing
NCAAe PPG
A.J. Reid
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.18 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jonathan Davis
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.03 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Gerald Mayhew
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.56 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Roman Ammirato
Utica · 2012-13
1.296 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Bailey Conger
UMass Boston · 2016-17
2.500 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Luke Moodie
SUNY Oswego · 2008-09
0.926 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.