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

Kyle Miller Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-10-14 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
2022-23 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 18 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2023-24 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 59 9 33 42 0.712 0.2616 0.2665 0.7514 0.7655
2024-25 St. Cloud Norsemen NAHL 59 13 53 66 1.119 0.4110 0.3971 1.1807 1.1408
■ 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 Manhattanville D1 UCHC JR 4 0 1 1 0.250
2019-20 Manhattanville D1 UCHC SO 23 0 4 4 0.174

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

38%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
25%
Age-Out / Club
38%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#3314
Defenseman overall
#803
Defenseman born in 2004
#870
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Paul LaDue
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Van Voorhis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Denver (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Barrett Kaib
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Providence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Victor Newell
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Harvard (0.67 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Fleming
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Maxim Maziarchuk
Morrisville · 2023-24
0.684 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Tommy Malkmus
Finlandia · 2013-14
0.409 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Dustin Norman
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2004-05
0.850 Strong
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.