← New Search ↗ Social Card

Maddie Rowe Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1998-09-03 Country: USA
Signed Professionally
Minnesota Whitecaps · PHF

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 St. Croix Valley Fusion USHS-W 24 11 15 26 1.083 0.3153 0.3433
2013-14 St. Croix Valley Fusion USHS-W 24 30 22 52 2.167 0.6307 0.6549
2014-15 St. Croix Valley Fusion USHS-W 24 22 31 53 2.208 0.6428 0.6366
2015-16 St. Croix Valley Fusion USHS-W 23 33 25 58 2.522 0.7341 0.6871
2020-21 Minnesota Whitecaps PHF 4 0 0 0 0.000
2021-22 Minnesota Whitecaps PHF 20 0 2 2 0.100
2022-23 Minnesota Whitecaps PHF 18 0 1 1 0.056
2023-24 Minnesota Whitecaps PHF 18 0 1 1 0.056
2024-25 Minnesota Whitecaps PHF 18 0 1 1 0.056
2025-26 Minnesota Whitecaps PHF 18 0 1 1 0.056
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
2019-20 Wisconsin D1 36 2 3 5 0.139
2018-19 Wisconsin D1 40 0 4 4 0.100
2017-18 Wisconsin D1 WCHA-W SO 36 7 12 19 0.528
2016-17 Wisconsin D1 WCHA-W FR 40 2 0 2 0.050
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.68
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.05
2016-17 · Wisconsin
-92.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#26
Defenseman overall
#10
Defenseman born in 1998

D1 Comparables

USHS-W · 2013-14 · 2.14 PPG
→ Cornell (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.62 Average D
NCAAe PPG
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 2.80 PPG
→ Cornell (0.76 D1 FR PPG)
0.82 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 2.17 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.56 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Cornell ·
0.212 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Cornell ·
0.758 Elite D
actual D2/3 PPG
Quinnipiac ·
0.351 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.