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

Daphne Gray Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense 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 Alaska All Stars 16U AAA 16U-AAA-W 39 1 4 5 0.128 0.0575 0.0575 — —
■ 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 — — 24 0 3 3 0.125
2024-25 Buffalo State D3 — — 24 0 2 2 0.083
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.08
2024-25 · Buffalo State
+52.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

10%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
90%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#5077
Defenseman overall
#387
in 16U-AAA-W

D1 Comparables

Lauren Niska
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth
0.05 No data
NCAAe PPG
Kate Glover
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.35 PPG
→ Harvard (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Abby Ecker
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.42 PPG
→ Bemidji State
0.06 No data
NCAAe PPG
Serena Sommerfield
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Boston College
0.05 No data
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Jackson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.07 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lauren Niska
Minnesota Duluth ·
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Kate Glover
Harvard ·
0.167 Developing D
actual D2/3 PPG
Abby Ecker
Bemidji State ·
0.000 No data
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.