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

Haley Knauf 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
2018-19 Rock County Fury USHS-W 24 11 22 33 1.375 0.4135 0.4135 — —
2019-20 — USHS-W 24 21 27 48 2.000 0.6014 0.6014 — —
■ 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
2023-24 Aurora D3 NCHA — 28 6 8 14 0.500
2022-23 Aurora D3 NCHA — 27 3 4 7 0.259
2021-22 Aurora D3 NCHA — 26 4 3 7 0.269
2020-21 Aurora D3 NCHA — 5 1 0 1 0.200
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.35
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.20
2020-21 · Aurora
-43.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

30%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
70%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#627
Forward overall
#209
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Reagan Haley
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.80 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Rebecca Lindblad
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 1.43 PPG
→ UConn (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Dana Rasmussen
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.62 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 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
Casey Leveillee
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.63 PPG
→ Vermont (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Reagan Haley
Minnesota Duluth ·
0.108 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Rebecca Lindblad
UConn ·
0.057 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Dana Rasmussen
Ohio State ·
0.167 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.