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

Sydney Radecki Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin 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
2017-18 Lancaster/Iroquois/Depew USHS-W 19 2 1 3 0.158 0.0475 0.0475 — —
■ 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 Buffalo State D3 — — 23 10 8 18 0.783
2024-25 Buffalo State D3 — — 25 6 6 12 0.480
2023-24 Buffalo State D3 — — 25 1 5 6 0.240
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.04
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.24
2023-24 · Buffalo State
+489.7% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

5%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
95%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#12407
Forward overall
#4090
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Presley Norby
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average
NCAAe PPG
Mallory Rushton
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.07 PPG
→ RIT (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Laura Anderson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Yale (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Heise
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.90 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Katie McMillan
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Penn State (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Presley Norby
Wisconsin ·
0.525 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Mallory Rushton
RIT ·
0.125 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Laura Anderson
Yale ·
0.290 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.