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

Sierra Semmel Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-11-17 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 Loomis Chaffee NE-Prep-Girls 23 2 4 6 0.260 0.1196 0.1196 — —
2013-14 Connecticut Polar Bears 19U 19U-AAA-W 38 6 10 16 0.421 0.1455 0.1513 — —
2014-15 Loomis Chaffee NE-Prep-Girls 23 3 1 4 0.170 0.0782 0.0782 — —
2015-16 Washington Pride 19U AAA JWHL-U19 29 5 10 15 0.517 0.1720 0.1519 — —
■ 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
2017-18 Maine D1 HEA-W — 9 0 0 0 0.000
2016-17 Maine D1 HEA-W FR 15 0 0 0 0.000

NCAAe Rankings

#6094
Forward overall
#191
Forward born in 1996

D1 Comparables

Carly Bullock
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.92 PPG
→ Princeton (0.81 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Emily Antony
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.92 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.44 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Average
NCAAe PPG
Lydia Passolt
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.89 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Holly Dietzler
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.84 PPG
→ Lindenwood (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jessica Bonfe
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.84 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Carly Bullock
Princeton ·
0.812 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Emily Antony
Minnesota ·
0.444 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Lydia Passolt
Bemidji State ·
0.095 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.