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

Aimee Briand 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
2011-12 Berwick NE-Prep-Girls 18 10 12 22 1.220 0.7570 0.7570 — —
2012-13 Berwick NE-Prep-Girls 21 13 6 19 0.900 0.5585 0.5585 — —
2013-14 Berwick NE-Prep-Girls 24 16 15 31 1.290 0.8004 0.8004 — —
2014-15 Berwick NE-Prep-Girls 29 10 17 27 0.930 0.5771 0.5771 — —
■ 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 Castleton D3 NEHC — 27 11 15 26 0.963
2017-18 Castleton D3 NEHC — 27 13 11 24 0.889
2016-17 Castleton D3 NEHC — 26 8 10 18 0.692
2015-16 Castleton D3 NEHC — 21 6 11 17 0.810
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.62
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.81
2015-16 · Castleton
+30.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#785
Forward overall
#65
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Ivy Dynek
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 1.92 PPG
→ St. Cloud State
0.58 No data
NCAAe PPG
Annie Roche
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 1.88 PPG
→ Colgate
0.56 No data
NCAAe PPG
Saana Valkama
SMLIIGA-W · 2012-13 · 1.43 PPG
→ Vermont (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.56 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Andrea Renner
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 2.00 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.60 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Katie Detert
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 1.80 PPG
→ St. Cloud State
0.54 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Ivy Dynek
St. Cloud State ·
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Annie Roche
Colgate ·
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Saana Valkama
Vermont ·
0.314 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.