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

Kendra Nealey Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense 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
2013-14 Chicago Romans Orange USHS-W 7 12 3 15 2.143 0.6238 0.6238 — —
2014-15 Chicago Romans Orange USHS-W 11 13 11 24 2.182 0.6351 0.6351 — —
■ 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
2020-21 Cornell D1 ECAC-W SR 0 0 0 0 0.000
2019-20 Cornell D1 ECAC-W JR 32 1 11 12 0.375
2018-19 Cornell D1 ECAC-W SO 36 0 12 12 0.333
2017-18 Cornell D1 ECAC-W FR 33 5 2 7 0.212
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.65
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.21
2017-18 · Cornell
-67.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#34
Defenseman overall
#79
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Meghan Turner
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 2.17 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.56 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Heidi Niskanen
SMLIIGA-W · 2012-13 · 1.19 PPG
→ RPI
0.52 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Meghan Turner
Quinnipiac ·
0.351 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.