← New Search ↗ Social Card

Luc Plante Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2007-05-21 Country: USA
Northern Michigan
CCHA D1

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
2024-25 Fairbanks Ice Dogs NAHL 56 12 28 40 0.714 0.2624 0.2876 0.7539 0.8264
2025-26 Erie Otters OHL 67 5 10 15 0.224 0.1295 0.1296 0.5753 0.5758
Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

25%
NCAA D1
10%
NCAA D2/D3
30%
Age-Out / Club
32%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#29216
Forward overall
#1014
Forward born in 2007

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.30 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.46 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.03 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG

Northern Michigan Alumni similar profiles who attended this school

NAHL 2014-15
0.06
actual FR PPG at Northern Michigan
USHL 2014-15
0.20
actual FR PPG at Northern Michigan
AJHL 2021-22
0.05
actual FR PPG at Northern Michigan
USHL 2016-17
0.16
actual FR PPG at Northern Michigan

D2/3 Comparables

Curry · 2003-04
1.308 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Augsburg · 2016-17
0.462 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Salem State · 2021-22
1.269 Elite
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.