← New Search ↗ Social Card

Tyler MacKenzie Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-06-06 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
2020-21 Medicine Hat Tigers WHL 19 1 1 2 0.105 0.0512 0.0512 0.2580 0.2580
2021-22 Medicine Hat Tigers WHL 52 4 22 26 0.500 0.2432 0.2551 1.2251 1.2853
2022-23 Medicine Hat Tigers WHL 58 18 22 40 0.690 0.3355 0.3363 1.6900 1.6942
2023-24 Medicine Hat Tigers WHL 68 16 31 47 0.691 0.3363 0.3206 1.6936 1.6144
2024-25 Everett Silvertips WHL 67 33 45 78 1.164 0.5664 0.5096 2.8526 2.5668
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 Western Michigan D1 NCHC FR 29 0 6 6 0.207
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.37
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.21
2025-26 · Western Michigan
-44.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

22%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
60%
Age-Out / Club
18%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#7201
Forward overall
#253
Forward born in 2004
#309
in WHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.51 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.94 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Average
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.33 PPG
→ UMass (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.95 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ RIT (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Aurora · 2013-14
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Salem State · 2021-22
1.111 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Buffalo State · 2023-24
1.120 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.