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

Natalie Ryan Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense 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
2012-13 Upper Fox Valley USHS-W 13 6 8 14 1.077 0.3238 0.3238 — —
2013-14 Upper Fox Valley USHS-W 12 16 9 25 2.083 0.6264 0.6264 — —
2014-15 Upper Fox Valley USHS-W 12 15 4 19 1.583 0.4761 0.4761 — —
■ 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
2019-20 Saint Mary's D3 MIAC SR 27 4 7 11 0.407
2019-20 Saint Mary's (MN) D3 MIAC — 27 4 7 11 0.407
2018-19 Saint Mary's D3 MIAC JR 26 8 7 15 0.577
2018-19 Saint Mary's (MN) D3 MIAC — 26 8 7 15 0.577
2017-18 Saint Mary's (MN) D3 MIAC SO 25 5 9 14 0.560
2016-17 Saint Mary's (MN) D3 MIAC FR 23 3 3 6 0.261
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.55
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.26
2016-17 · Saint Mary's (MN)
-52.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#106
Defenseman overall
#258
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Taylor Marchin
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Yale (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Lauren Kelly
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Dartmouth (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.45 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
Megan Wolfe
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.40 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.72 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Taylor Marchin
Yale ·
0.207 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Lauren Kelly
Dartmouth ·
0.208 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.