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

Kyle DeMarco Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-04-22 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
2021-22 Amarillo Wranglers NAHL 58 2 6 8 0.138 0.0490 0.0510 0.1448 0.1508
2022-23 Amarillo Wranglers NAHL 60 4 8 12 0.200 0.0710 0.0705 0.2100 0.2084
2023-24 Amarillo Wranglers NAHL 58 3 18 21 0.362 0.1286 0.1215 0.3802 0.3591
■ 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 Trine D3 NCHA SO 19 0 1 1 0.053
2024-25 Trine D3 NCHA — 23 0 5 5 0.217
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.10
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.22
2024-25 · Trine
+127.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

15%
NCAA D1
12%
NCAA D2/D3
70%
Age-Out / Club
2%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#16527
Defenseman overall
#3007
Defenseman born in 2003
#5161
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Michael Holland
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ RIT (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Max Novick
SUNY Oswego · 2016-17
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Alex Sheehy
New England · 2018-19
0.647 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ben Pizzimenti
Concordia (WI) · 2021-22
0.346 Developing
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.