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

Brooke Maggy 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
2013-14 Anaheim Lady Ducks 16U AAA 16U-AAA-W 57 8 10 18 0.316 0.1416 0.1416 — —
■ 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 Plymouth State D3 NEHC — 25 8 7 15 0.600
2017-18 Plymouth State D3 NEHC — 27 6 2 8 0.296
2016-17 Plymouth State D3 NEHC — 25 1 2 3 0.120
2015-16 Plymouth State D3 NEHC — 26 5 6 11 0.423
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.42
2015-16 · Plymouth State
+249.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6552
Forward overall
#196
in 16U-AAA-W

D1 Comparables

Carly Bullock
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.92 PPG
→ Princeton (0.81 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Emily Antony
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.92 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average
NCAAe PPG
Vilma Tanskanen
SMLIIGA-W · 2012-13 · 0.35 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Lydia Passolt
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.89 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Amanda Bäckebo
SDHL · 2012-13 · 0.11 PPG
→ Syracuse (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Carly Bullock
Princeton ·
0.812 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Emily Antony
Minnesota State ·
0.444 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Vilma Tanskanen
North Dakota ·
0.182 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.