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

Teague Porter Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2002-10-25 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 WB/Scranton Knights USPHL-Premier 42 34 38 72 1.714 0.2242 0.2255 0.5818 0.5853
2022-23 WB/Scranton Knights NCDC 43 12 11 23 0.535 0.2181 0.2119 0.4300 0.4178
■ 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
2024-25 Wilkes D3 MAC — 12 0 0 0 0.000
2023-24 Wilkes D3 MAC — 13 3 4 7 0.538
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.54
2023-24 · Wilkes
+189.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

28%
NCAA D2/D3
0%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#8166
Forward overall
#387
Forward born in 2002

D1 Comparables

Tyler Deresky
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Bentley (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cullen Hurley
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.38 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.21 No data
NCAAe PPG
Max Birkinbine
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Air Force (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Emil Romig
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.00 PPG
→ Denver (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Bryan Tang
Skidmore · 2024-25
0.571 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Cody Pisarczyk
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2024-25
0.462 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Shael Hechter
Gustavus Adolphus · 2009-10
0.500 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.