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

Jeff Zatorski Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1985-10-13 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
2005-06 Mississauga Chargers OJHL 49 5 24 29 0.592 0.1653 0.1530 0.4084 0.3779
■ 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
2008-09 SUNY Potsdam D3 — JR 24 5 12 17 0.708
2007-08 SUNY Potsdam D3 — SO 27 6 10 16 0.593
2006-07 SUNY Potsdam D3 — FR 23 4 8 12 0.522
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.52
2006-07 · SUNY Potsdam
+261.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6018
Defenseman overall
#896
Defenseman born in 1985
#2106
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Patrick Koudys
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ RPI (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Zink
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Kirk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ Dartmouth
0.19 No data
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Valleau
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Jake Flynn
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ UConn (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Aaron Degerness
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2001-02
0.903 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Will Robertson
Lawrence · 2017-18
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Jason Fleck
Augsburg · 2003-04
0.583 Average
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.