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

Sophia DeAnzeris Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2006-11-19 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
2023-24 Northwood School 19U-AAA-W 72 7 26 33 0.458 0.1583 0.1591 — —
2024-25 Northwood School USHS-W 62 6 17 23 0.371 0.1080 0.0992 — —
■ 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
2025-26 Vermont D1 HEA-W FR 37 0 4 4 0.108
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.11
2025-26 · Vermont
-7.1% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

8%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
90%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#2763
Defenseman overall
#359
Defenseman born in 2006

D1 Comparables

Amanda Kimmerle
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.60 PPG
→ RPI (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Megan Hinze
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.60 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Cheyenne Harris
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Union (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Turnquist
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Andrea Olson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.58 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.09 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Amanda Kimmerle
RPI ·
0.059 Developing D
actual D2/3 PPG
Megan Hinze
Minnesota ·
0.182 Developing D
actual D2/3 PPG
Cheyenne Harris
Union ·
0.324 Average D
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.