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

Brandi Wilson 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
2017-18 Little Caesars 19U AAA JWHL-U19 26 14 17 31 1.192 0.4476 0.4476 — —
■ 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
2021-22 Trine D3 — — 27 21 19 40 1.481
2020-21 Trine D3 — — 10 1 0 1 0.100
2019-20 Trine D3 — — 23 5 11 16 0.696
2018-19 Trine D3 — — 23 3 3 6 0.261
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.38
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.26
2018-19 · Trine
-31.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

28%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
72%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#1184
Forward overall
#25
in JWHL-U19

D1 Comparables

Dana Rasmussen
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.96 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.45 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Reagan Haley
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.92 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Haley Mack
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.88 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Average
NCAAe PPG
Lauren Abbenante
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 1.54 PPG
→ Holy Cross (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.46 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Kelly Pannek
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 3.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (1.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.47 Elite
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Dana Rasmussen
Ohio State ·
0.167 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Reagan Haley
Minnesota Duluth ·
0.108 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Haley Mack
Bemidji State ·
0.371 Average
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.