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

Mackenzie Martin 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
2010-11 New Trier High USHS-W 18 15 7 22 1.222 0.3675 0.3675 — —
■ 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
2014-15 Middlebury D3 NESCAC SR 23 0 3 3 0.130
2013-14 Middlebury D3 NESCAC JR 22 4 1 5 0.227
2012-13 Middlebury D3 NESCAC SO 5 0 0 0 0.000
2011-12 Middlebury D3 NESCAC FR 3 0 1 1 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.31
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2011-12 · Middlebury
+5.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#1473
Forward overall
#503
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Jordan McLaughlin
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.22 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Catherine Skaja
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.21 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Carly Bullock
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.20 PPG
→ Princeton (0.81 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Karlie Lund
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.20 PPG
→ Princeton (1.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Caroline Murphy
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.78 PPG
→ Yale (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Erica Schramel
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2015-16
0.360 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Shauna Bollinger
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2011-12
0.321 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Gracyn Knowles
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2024-25
0.548 Average
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.