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

Tyler Duke Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-07-19 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
2020-21 U.S. National U17 Team NTDP-U18 44 3 22 25 0.568 0.4406 0.4406 2.1148 2.1148
2021-22 U.S. National U18 Team NTDP-U18 54 3 15 18 0.333 0.2584 0.2555 1.2405 1.2265
■ 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 Michigan D1 BigTen SR 40 2 16 18 0.450
2024-25 Michigan D1 BigTen SO 29 5 8 13 0.448
2023-24 Michigan D1 BigTen FR 38 2 14 16 0.421
2022-23 Ohio State D1 BigTen — 40 4 8 12 0.300
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.24
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.30
2022-23 · Ohio State
+24.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

65%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
12%
Age-Out / Club
20%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#3763
Defenseman overall
#967
Defenseman born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Neal Pionk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Corey Schueneman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Keaton Thompson
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Teemu Kivihalme
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.25 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Michael Downing
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ Michigan (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

John Barrett
Wilkes · 2016-17
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Scott Hudson
Manhattanville · 2004-05
1.231 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Luke Moodie
SUNY Oswego · 2005-06
0.926 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.