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

Tyler Hansen Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-07-13 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
2023-24 — NCDC 44 1 5 6 0.136 0.0556 0.0556 0.1096 0.1097
2024-25 Rock Springs Miners NCDC 53 5 13 18 0.340 0.1385 0.1324 0.2730 0.2611
■ 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 Concordia D3 MIAC FR 3 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

42%
NCAA D2/D3
8%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#10169
Defenseman overall
#2202
Defenseman born in 2004
#1261
in NCDC

D1 Comparables

Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.11 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Benjamin Gallacher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Chris Blessing
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2011-12
0.333 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Joe Bitz
St. Norbert · 2006-07
0.333 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Coltyn Bates
Wisconsin-Superior · 2017-18
0.208 Developing
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.