← New Search ↗ Social Card

Tyler Procious Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-05-29 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
2019-20 Omaha Lancers USHL 3 0 0 0 0.000
2020-21 Muskegon Lumberjacks USHL 27 1 4 5 0.185 0.1092 0.1092 0.5456 0.5456
2021-22 Waterloo Black Hawks USHL 54 2 15 17 0.315 0.1857 0.1868 0.9275 0.9329
2022-23 Waterloo Black Hawks USHL 17 2 5 7 0.412 0.2429 0.2317 1.2132 1.1572
2023-24 Rochester Jr. Americans NAHL 44 4 40 44 1.000 0.3552 0.3373 1.0499 0.9971
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 Utica D3 UCHC SO 19 0 7 7 0.368
2024-25 American International D1 AHA 32 1 5 6 0.188
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.28
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.19
2024-25 · American International
-32.7% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

35%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
48%
Age-Out / Club
18%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#2994
Defenseman overall
#746
Defenseman born in 2003

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Bowling Green
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Denver (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Providence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Endicott · 2014-15
1.143 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Western Connecticut · 2024-25
0.708 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Saint Mary's (MN) · 2021-22
0.480 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.