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

Walker Duehr Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1997-11-23 Country: USA
Signed Professionally

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
2014-15 — USHL 49 2 5 7 0.143 0.0843 0.0910 0.4292 0.4634
2015-16 — USHL 38 10 13 23 0.605 0.3571 0.3689 1.8180 1.8782
2016-17 — USHL 58 15 19 34 0.586 0.3458 0.3396 1.7606 1.7291
■ 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 Minnesota State D1 WCHA SR 28 10 7 17 0.607
2019-20 Minnesota State D1 WCHA JR 32 3 12 15 0.469
2018-19 Minnesota State D1 WCHA SO 34 10 6 16 0.471
2017-18 Minnesota State D1 WCHA FR 8 2 1 3 0.375
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.30
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.38
2017-18 · Minnesota State
+24.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Grant Opperman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.56 PPG
→ Dartmouth (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Villiam Haag
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
A.J. Fossen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Peter Krieger
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.92 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.39 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average
NCAAe PPG
Kevin Duane
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Boston University (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Jason Yuel
Curry · 2005-06
1.769 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Cole Hepler
Lebanon Valley · 2014-15
1.280 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Brian Berger
Marian · 2010-11
1.038 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.