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

Alex Walker Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-09-12 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
2023-24 Northern Cyclones USPHL-Elite 36 2 13 15 0.417 0.0500 0.0478 0.0957 0.0914
■ 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
2025-26 UMass Dartmouth D3 — JR 25 9 16 25 1.000
2024-25 UMass Dartmouth D3 — SO 18 8 6 14 0.778
2023-24 UMass Dartmouth D3 — FR 16 3 9 12 0.750

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

20%
NCAA D2/D3
2%
Club / ACHA
40%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#21353
Defenseman overall
#3248
Defenseman born in 2004
#893
in USPHL-Elite

D1 Comparables

Neal Goff
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Mike Preston
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.07 PPG
→ Army (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Christian Neumann
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ UConn (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
James Roll
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Cliff Watson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kyle Ross
Plymouth State · 2005-06
0.111 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Josh Herrington
Concordia Wisconsin · 2011-12
0.400 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Charlie Weiand
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2016-17
0.000 No data
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.