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

Megan Lyke Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin 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
2013-14 Irondale High USHS-MN-W 25 2 1 3 0.120 0.0181 0.0181 — —
2014-15 Irondale High USHS-MN-W 25 7 6 13 0.520 0.0785 0.0785 — —
2015-16 Irondale High USHS-MN-W 25 8 4 12 0.480 0.0725 0.0725 — —
2016-17 Irondale High USHS-MN-W 24 17 9 26 1.083 0.1636 0.1636 — —
■ 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
2020-21 Lake Forest D3 NCHA — 3 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 Lake Forest D3 NCHA — 27 4 4 8 0.296
2018-19 Lake Forest D3 NCHA — 27 6 0 6 0.222
2017-18 Lake Forest D3 NCHA — 26 13 13 26 1.000
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.11
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.00
2017-18 · Lake Forest
+819.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6808
Forward overall
#1643
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

Grace Zumwinkle
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (1.00 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Chancellor
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.08 PPG
→ Yale (0.52 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Average
NCAAe PPG
Sierra Semmel
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Maine
0.16 No data
NCAAe PPG
Liz Schepers
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.12 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Natalie Snodgrass
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.20 PPG
→ UConn (1.00 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Elite
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Grace Zumwinkle
Minnesota ·
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan Chancellor
Yale ·
0.517 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Sierra Semmel
Maine ·
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.