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

Luke Buss Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2003-02-14 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
2020-21 Sioux City Musketeers USHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2021-22 Vernon Vipers BCHL 48 16 20 36 0.750 0.2794 0.2824 1.0928 1.1047
2022-23 Muskegon Lumberjacks USHL 54 7 14 21 0.389 0.2391 0.2247 1.1458 1.0766
2023-24 — BCHL 52 29 26 55 1.058 0.3940 0.3609 1.5412 1.4117
■ 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 Union D1 ECAC SO 15 1 1 2 0.133
2024-25 Wisconsin D1 BigTen — 5 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

32%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
57%
Age-Out / Club
5%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#14003
Forward overall
#679
Forward born in 2003

D1 Comparables

Dylan Walchuk
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
Carlos Amestoy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.39 No data
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Alex Ochterbeck
Curry · 2017-18
0.654 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Nicholas Belger
SUNY Plattsburgh · 2014-15
0.905 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Connor Inger
New England College · 2017-18
0.692 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.