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

Baylee Darling 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
2011-12 Onalaska High USHS-W 24 18 28 46 1.917 0.5764 0.5764 — —
2012-13 Onalaska High USHS-W 23 21 25 46 2.000 0.6014 0.6014 — —
■ 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 Concordia (WI) D3 NCHA SR 25 5 5 10 0.400
2015-16 Concordia (WI) D3 NCHA JR 19 1 2 3 0.158
2014-15 Concordia (WI) D3 NCHA SO 18 3 2 5 0.278
2013-14 Concordia (WI) D3 NCHA FR 26 4 3 7 0.269
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.55
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.27
2013-14 · Concordia (WI)
-51.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#429
Forward overall
#122
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Andrea Renner
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 2.00 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.58 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Lauren Abbenante
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 1.30 PPG
→ Holy Cross (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.59 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Ivy Dynek
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 1.92 PPG
→ St. Cloud State
0.56 No data
NCAAe PPG
Kelly Pannek
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 3.45 PPG
→ Minnesota (1.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.55 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Nicole Schammel
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 3.44 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.55 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Casey Brown
Hamilton · 2010-11
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Geneva Lloyd
Amherst · 2006-07
1.107 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Bre Simon
Hamline · 2013-14
1.000 Elite
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.