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

Zachary Borsoi Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1994-06-29 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
2014-15 — CCHL 52 7 24 31 0.596 0.1293 0.1198 0.4612 0.4273
■ 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 Utica D3 UCHC SR 29 9 17 26 0.897
2017-18 Utica D3 UCHC JR 27 3 14 17 0.630
2016-17 Utica D3 UCHC SO 27 6 8 14 0.518
2015-16 Utica D3 UCHC FR 27 0 6 6 0.222
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.22
2015-16 · Utica
+96.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#7391
Defenseman overall
#1145
Defenseman born in 1994
#650
in CCHL

D1 Comparables

Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Roman Uchyn
St. Norbert · 2014-15
0.690 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan Neduzak
Wisconsin-Superior · 2012-13
0.429 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brayden Kolisniak
Wisconsin-Superior · 2007-08
0.667 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.