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

Eileen Harris 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 16 12 3 15 0.938 0.2819 0.2819 — —
2011-12 New Trier High USHS-W 21 9 5 14 0.667 0.2005 0.2005 — —
■ 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 Amherst D3 NESCAC — 29 0 2 2 0.069
2015-16 Amherst D3 NESCAC SR 21 11 9 20 0.952
2014-15 Amherst D3 NESCAC JR 23 4 4 8 0.348
2013-14 Amherst D3 NESCAC SO 21 6 7 13 0.619
2012-13 Amherst D3 NESCAC FR 24 2 6 8 0.333
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.20
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.33
2012-13 · Amherst
+67.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3315
Forward overall
#1184
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Sydney Brodt
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.32 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jackie Pieper
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.32 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sena Hanson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.36 PPG
→ Brown (0.63 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Savannah Quandt
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.36 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Mariah Gardner
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.40 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Sydney Brodt
Minnesota Duluth ·
0.600 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jackie Pieper
Merrimack ·
0.324 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Sena Hanson
Brown ·
0.630 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.