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

Luke Shiplo Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1995-05-31 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
2011-12 — OJHL 49 5 16 21 0.429 0.1198 0.1338 0.2958 0.3304
2012-13 Des Moines Buccaneers USHL 46 3 7 10 0.217 0.1384 0.1455 0.6515 0.6850
2013-14 Lincoln Stars USHL 47 1 6 7 0.149 0.0948 0.0952 0.4462 0.4483
2014-15 Vernon Vipers BCHL 50 5 39 44 0.880 0.3425 0.3366 1.2833 1.2611
■ 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
2018-19 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC SR 31 3 2 5 0.161
2017-18 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC JR 33 1 5 6 0.182
2016-17 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC SO 36 4 8 12 0.333
2015-16 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC FR 13 5 1 6 0.462
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.23
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.46
2015-16 · Quinnipiac
+103.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3431
Defenseman overall
#694
Defenseman born in 1995

D1 Comparables

Niklas Nevalainen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.23 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Tucker Poolman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.45 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Christopher Dienes
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Jared Kolquist
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Nick Neville
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.58 PPG
→ Denver (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Tyler Resch
Manhattanville · 2000-01
1.154 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Rihards Marenis
Aurora · 2012-13
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Dylan Clarke
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2005-06
1.267 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.