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

Megan Mohr 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
2013-14 Sartell/Sauk Rapids High (W) USHS-MN-W 25 5 9 14 0.560 0.0846 0.0846 — —
2014-15 Sartell/Sauk Rapids High (W) USHS-MN-W 25 5 15 20 0.800 0.1208 0.1208 — —
2015-16 Sartell/Sauk Rapids High (W) USHS-MN-W 25 7 16 23 0.920 0.1389 0.1389 — —
2016-17 Sartell/Sauk Rapids High (W) USHS-MN-W 25 4 17 21 0.840 0.1268 0.1268 — —
■ 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
2020-21 Concordia D3 — — 5 1 1 2 0.400
2019-20 Concordia D3 — — 21 3 4 7 0.333
2018-19 Concordia D3 — — 25 3 9 12 0.480
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.48
2018-19 · Concordia
+286.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#1841
Defenseman overall
#1379
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

Kenzie Prater
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.83 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.43 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Ebba Strandberg
SDHL · 2012-13 · 0.11 PPG
→ Maine (0.33 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Allison Roethke
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ Quinnipiac
0.12 No data
NCAAe PPG
Emma Turbyville
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 0.39 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Flaherty
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.76 PPG
→ North Dakota
0.11 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kenzie Prater
Quinnipiac ·
0.432 Strong D
actual D2/3 PPG
Ebba Strandberg
Maine ·
0.333 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Allison Roethke
Quinnipiac ·
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.