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

Katie Leffler Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-06-05 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
2016-17 Boston Shamrocks JWHL-U19 24 4 5 9 0.375 0.1408 0.1408 — —
■ 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 UMass Boston D3 — — 25 10 16 26 1.040
2019-20 UMass Boston D3 — — 26 12 10 22 0.846
2018-19 UMass Boston D3 — — 27 8 8 16 0.593
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.59
2018-19 · UMass Boston
+391.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6659
Forward overall
#248
Forward born in 1999
#213
in JWHL-U19

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.