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

Emilee Anderson 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 Chaska/Chanhassen USHS-MN-W 25 5 4 9 0.360 0.0544 0.0544 — —
2014-15 Chaska/Chanhassen USHS-MN-W 24 4 8 12 0.500 0.0755 0.0755 — —
2015-16 Chaska/Chanhassen USHS-MN-W 25 9 13 22 0.880 0.1329 0.1329 — —
2016-17 Chaska/Chanhassen USHS-MN-W 23 13 25 38 1.652 0.2495 0.2495 — —
■ 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 St. Catherine D3 — — 24 8 11 19 0.792
2018-19 St. Catherine D3 — — 25 7 3 10 0.400
2017-18 St. Catherine D3 — — 25 9 3 12 0.480
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.48
2017-18 · St. Catherine
+176.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#4421
Forward overall
#771
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

Taylor Williamson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.64 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.40 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Average
NCAAe PPG
Emily Gunderson
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.64 PPG
→ Lindenwood (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Christi Vetter
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.67 PPG
→ Penn State
0.25 No data
NCAAe PPG
Sophia Kunin
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.62 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Average
NCAAe PPG
Charly Dalhquist
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.68 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Taylor Williamson
Minnesota ·
0.395 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Emily Gunderson
Lindenwood ·
0.171 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Christi Vetter
Penn State ·
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.