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

Cade Gleekel Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1997-09-27 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 Benilde-St. Margaret's School USHS-MN 25 6 4 10 0.400 0.0506 0.0495 0.0972 0.0951
2016-17 Merritt Centennials BCHL 57 16 29 45 0.789 0.3042 0.3025 1.1490 1.1425
■ 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 St. Lawrence D1 ECAC JR 2 0 0 0 0.000
2018-19 St. Lawrence D1 ECAC SO 37 9 6 15 0.405
2017-18 St. Lawrence D1 ECAC FR 28 1 3 4 0.143
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.14
2017-18 · St. Lawrence
-17.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#25830
Forward overall
#1171
Forward born in 1997

D1 Comparables

Judd Peterson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG
C.J. Reuschlein
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ Army (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Max McHugh
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Landon Smith
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.79 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Strong
NCAAe PPG
A.J. Fossen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Austin Master
Stevenson · 2017-18
1.148 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Doug Lindensmith
Norwich · 2009-10
1.044 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Imala
Fitchburg State · 2021-22
0.731 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.