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

Holly Turnbull Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1996-11-24 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
2011-12 Hayward High USHS-W 15 11 19 30 2.000 0.6014 0.6014 — —
2012-13 Hayward High USHS-W 23 10 36 46 2.000 0.6014 0.6014 — —
■ 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
2018-19 Wisconsin-Eau Claire D3 — SR 29 11 18 29 1.000
2017-18 Wisconsin-Eau Claire D3 — JR 30 13 7 20 0.667
2016-17 Wisconsin-Eau Claire D3 — SO 26 5 12 17 0.654
2015-16 Wisconsin-Eau Claire D3 — FR 27 3 4 7 0.259
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.62
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.26
2015-16 · Wisconsin-Eau Claire
-58.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#46
Defenseman overall
#27
Defenseman born in 1996
#111
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Kendra Nealey
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 2.14 PPG
→ Cornell (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.64 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Briana Mastel
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 1.04 PPG
→ Harvard (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.65 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Anna Wright
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Maine
0.53 No data
NCAAe PPG
Meghan Turner
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 2.17 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.58 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Marchin
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Yale (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kendra Nealey
Cornell ·
0.212 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Briana Mastel
Harvard ·
0.258 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Anna Wright
Maine ·
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.