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

Luke Nickels Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1991-08-20 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
2010-11 Toledo Cherokee NA3HL 42 3 13 16 0.381 0.0459 0.0450 0.1204 0.1181
2011-12 Pembroke Lumber Kings CCHL 1 0 1 1 1.000 0.2854 0.2636 0.7741 0.7150
■ 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
2015-16 Johnson & Wales D3 CNE SR 25 1 3 4 0.160
2014-15 Johnson & Wales D3 CNE JR 17 1 0 1 0.059
2013-14 Johnson & Wales D3 CNE SO 24 0 4 4 0.167
2012-13 Johnson & Wales D3 CNE FR 10 0 2 2 0.200
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.20
2012-13 · Johnson & Wales
+20.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#22342
Defenseman overall
#1970
Defenseman born in 1991

D1 Comparables

Benjamin Gallacher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Casey Nelson
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Zink
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Jake Flynn
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ UConn (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mac Olson
Hobart · 2011-12
0.846 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Phil Cherneski
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2000-01
0.739 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Teddy Purcell
SUNY Geneseo · 2005-06
0.550 Average
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.