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

Madie Leidt Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1998-10-07 Country: Hungary
Signed Professionally
Linköping HC · SDHL

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
2025-26 Linköping HC SDHL 35 11 11 22 0.629 0.7351 0.6044 — —
■ 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
2021-22 Middlebury D3 — — 25 19 12 31 1.240
2019-20 Middlebury D3 — — 27 19 16 35 1.296
2018-19 Middlebury D3 — — 27 11 14 25 0.926
2017-18 Middlebury D3 — FR 28 15 12 27 0.964

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

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

NCAAe Rankings

#200
Forward overall
#7
Forward born in 1998
#77
in SDHL

D1 Comparables

Andrea Renner
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 2.00 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.60 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Nicole Schammel
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 4.16 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.63 Strong
NCAAe PPG
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

D2/3 Comparables

Andrea Renner
Northeastern ·
0.167 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Nicole Schammel
Minnesota State ·
0.611 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Ivy Dynek
St. Cloud 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.