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

Luke Lisko Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-05-24 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 U.S. National U18 Team NTDP-U18 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2022-23 Sherwood Park Crusaders AJHL 43 17 15 32 0.744 0.2469 0.2530 0.6897 0.7068
2023-24 Sherwood Park Crusaders AJHL 24 8 8 16 0.667 0.2212 0.2162 0.6179 0.6041
■ 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 Ferris State D1 CCHA — 2 0 0 0 0.000
2024-25 Ferris State D1 CCHA — 3 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

38%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
22%
Age-Out / Club
35%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#29077
Forward overall
#1712
Forward born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Tanner Pond
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Alfred Larsson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Matt Pohlkamp
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG
Tommy Schutt
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Zach Saar
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Penn State (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Don Olivieri
Utica · 2010-11
0.815 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Greg Pezza
Connecticut College · 2015-16
0.300 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Colin Vassallo
SUNY Oswego · 2022-23
0.885 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.