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

Natalia Asimakis 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 18 14 32 1.231 0.4620 0.4620 — —
■ 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 Plattsburgh D3 SUNYAC FR 13 1 2 3 0.231
2018-19 Plattsburgh State D3 — — 13 1 2 3 0.231
2018-19 SUNY Plattsburgh D3 SUNYAC — 13 1 2 3 0.231
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.40
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.23
2018-19 · Plattsburgh
-41.6% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

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

NCAAe Rankings

#1102
Forward overall
#24
in JWHL-U19

D1 Comparables

Rebecca Lindblad
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 1.43 PPG
→ UConn (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Katie Rooney
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.52 PPG
→ RPI (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Darby Dodds
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.52 PPG
→ Lindenwood
0.40 No data
NCAAe PPG
Dana Rasmussen
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.62 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Corbin Boyd
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.42 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Callie Hoff
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2013-14
1.321 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Amanda Sergent
Wisconsin-Superior · 2015-16
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Taylor Whitney
Plattsburgh · 2017-18
0.862 Strong
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.