← New Search ↗ Social Card

Mary Kate Eiden 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
2012-13 Academy of Holy Angels (W) USHS-MN-W 22 3 3 6 0.273 0.0412 0.0412
2013-14 Academy of Holy Angels (W) USHS-MN-W 25 5 15 20 0.800 0.1208 0.1208
2014-15 Academy of Holy Angels (W) USHS-MN-W 24 7 8 15 0.625 0.0944 0.0944
2015-16 Academy of Holy Angels (W) USHS-MN-W 24 9 5 14 0.583 0.0881 0.0881
2016-17 Academy of Holy Angels (W) USHS-MN-W 25 12 9 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
2019-20 St. Olaf D3 25 3 5 8 0.320
2018-19 St. Olaf D3 25 3 5 8 0.320
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.10
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.32
2018-19 · St. Olaf
+235.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#7296
Forward overall
#1848
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.84 PPG
→ Lindenwood (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.84 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.84 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing
NCAAe PPG
SMLIIGA-W · 2012-13 · 0.32 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Holy Cross (0.82 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Elite
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lindenwood ·
0.108 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Merrimack ·
0.206 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Minnesota Duluth ·
0.143 Developing
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.