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

Ella Rago Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-10-06 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
2019-20 Lawrence Academy NE-Prep-Girls 30 1 0 1 0.030 0.0186 0.0186 — —
■ 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 Endicott D3 — JR 28 8 11 19 0.679
2024-25 Endicott D3 NEHC — 26 4 13 17 0.654
2023-24 Assumption D1 NEWHA FR 32 3 8 11 0.344
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.02
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.34
2023-24 · Assumption
+2062.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

2%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
98%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#16377
Forward overall
#713
Forward born in 2004
#1528
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Stella Haberman
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.12 PPG
→ RIT (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.02 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Anna Johnson
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 0.05 PPG
→ Mercyhurst (0.03 D1 FR PPG)
0.02 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Amber Moore
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 0.05 PPG
→ Cornell (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.01 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Olivia Arkell
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.02 No data
NCAAe PPG
Haley Mullins
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.04 PPG
→ Harvard (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.02 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Stella Haberman
RIT ·
0.125 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Anna Johnson
Mercyhurst ·
0.027 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Amber Moore
Cornell ·
0.133 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.