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

Meghan Turner Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1994-08-07 Country: USA
Signed Professionally
Worcester Blades · CWHL

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 Phillips Exeter Academy USHS-W 23 22 28 50 2.174 0.6328 0.5601 — —
2018-19 Worcester Blades CWHL 21 0 2 2 0.095 — — — —
2019-20 Worcester Blades CWHL 21 0 2 2 0.095 — — — —
2020-21 Worcester Blades CWHL 21 0 2 2 0.095 — — — —
2021-22 Worcester Blades CWHL 21 0 2 2 0.095 — — — —
2022-23 Worcester Blades CWHL 21 0 2 2 0.095 — — — —
2023-24 Worcester Blades CWHL 21 0 2 2 0.095 — — — —
2025-26 Worcester Blades CWHL 21 0 2 2 0.095 — — — —
■ 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
2016-17 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC-W SR 37 12 10 22 0.595
2015-16 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC-W JR 37 8 4 12 0.324
2014-15 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC-W SO 38 4 1 5 0.132
2013-14 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC-W FR 37 5 8 13 0.351
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.57
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.35
2013-14 · Quinnipiac
-38.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#35
Defenseman overall
#14
Defenseman born in 1994

D1 Comparables

Kendra Nealey
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 2.14 PPG
→ Cornell (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.62 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Briana Mastel
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 1.04 PPG
→ Harvard (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Heidi Niskanen
SMLIIGA-W · 2012-13 · 1.19 PPG
→ RPI
0.52 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kendra Nealey
Cornell ·
0.212 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Briana Mastel
Harvard ·
0.258 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Heidi Niskanen
RPI ·
0.000 No data
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.