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

Jenna Caballero 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
2021-22 Newark Ironbound 19U AAA 19U-AAA-W 20 15 12 27 1.350 0.4597 0.4597 — —
■ 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 Suffolk D3 — JR 26 4 9 13 0.500
2024-25 Suffolk D3 NEHC — 27 1 13 14 0.518
2023-24 Suffolk D3 NEHC — 25 6 8 14 0.560
2022-23 Suffolk D3 NEHC — 27 7 6 13 0.481
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.39
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.48
2022-23 · Suffolk
+22.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

40%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
60%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#777
Forward overall
#13
in 19U-AAA-W

D1 Comparables

Lauren Abbenante
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 1.54 PPG
→ Holy Cross (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Kelly Pannek
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 3.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (1.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.47 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Dana Rasmussen
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.96 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.45 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jessie Aney
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 3.17 PPG
→ UConn (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Reagan Haley
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.92 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lauren Abbenante
Holy Cross ·
0.607 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kelly Pannek
Minnesota ·
1.073 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Dana Rasmussen
Ohio State ·
0.167 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.