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

Erin Dillon 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
2014-15 Berkshire NE-Prep-Girls 21 3 1 4 0.190 0.1179 0.1179 — —
2015-16 Berkshire NE-Prep-Girls 25 0 1 1 0.040 0.0248 0.0248 — —
■ 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 Connecticut College D3 — — 3 3 3 6 2.000
2020-21 UConn D1 HEA-W — 4 5 3 8 2.000
2019-20 Connecticut College D3 — — 23 13 13 26 1.130
2019-20 UConn D1 HEA-W — 25 13 13 26 1.040
2018-19 Connecticut College D3 — — 21 8 3 11 0.524
2018-19 UConn D1 HEA-W — 23 8 3 11 0.478
2017-18 Connecticut College D3 — FR 24 9 7 16 0.667
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.67
2017-18 · Connecticut College
+1156.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#12407
Forward overall
#912
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Haley Mullins
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.04 PPG
→ Harvard (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.02 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Becca Gilmore
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.04 PPG
→ Harvard (1.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.02 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Olivia Arkell
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.16 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.02 No data
NCAAe PPG
Megan Berg
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.03 No data
NCAAe PPG
Morgan McKim
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 0.10 PPG
→ Cornell (0.09 D1 FR PPG)
0.03 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Haley Mullins
Harvard ·
0.306 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Becca Gilmore
Harvard ·
1.167 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Olivia Arkell
Minnesota ·
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.