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

Paige Michel 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
2011-12 Northfield Mt. Hermon NE-Prep-Girls 14 0 6 6 0.430 0.1978 0.1978 — —
2012-13 Northfield Mt. Hermon NE-Prep-Girls 27 2 1 3 0.110 0.0506 0.0506 — —
2013-14 Connecticut Polar Bears 19U 19U-AAA-W 30 0 6 6 0.200 0.0691 0.0691 — —
2014-15 Northfield Mt. Hermon NE-Prep-Girls 24 1 0 1 0.040 0.0184 0.0184 — —
■ 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
2018-19 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC — 23 3 5 8 0.348
2018-19 UConn D1 HEA-W — 23 3 5 8 0.348
2016-17 Connecticut College D3 — SO 12 0 2 2 0.167
2015-16 Connecticut College D3 — FR 9 2 4 6 0.667
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.04
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.67
2015-16 · Connecticut College
+1727.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#4258
Defenseman overall
#740
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Caroline Buckholtz
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.04 PPG
→ Brown
0.02 No data
NCAAe PPG
Natasha Rachlin
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.04 PPG
→ Harvard (0.09 D1 FR PPG)
0.02 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Hannah Schultz
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.12 PPG
→ Union (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.02 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Anna Erickson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.13 PPG
→ Vermont (0.03 D1 FR PPG)
0.02 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Paige Sorensen
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.09 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.01 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Caroline Buckholtz
Brown ·
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Natasha Rachlin
Harvard ·
0.088 Developing D
actual D2/3 PPG
Hannah Schultz
Union ·
0.267 Average D
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.