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

Mia Lopata Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2003-05-13 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
2018-19 Clinton High USHS-W 13 9 5 14 1.077 0.3135 0.3278 — —
2019-20 Clinton High USHS-W 16 14 11 25 1.562 0.4548 0.4548 — —
2020-21 Clinton High USHS-W 5 6 4 10 2.000 0.5822 0.5822 — —
■ 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 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC-W SR 37 0 7 7 0.189
2024-25 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC-W JR 38 0 2 2 0.053
2023-24 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC-W SO 37 1 6 7 0.189
2022-23 Quinnipiac D1 ECAC-W FR 36 0 2 2 0.056
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.31
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.06
2022-23 · Quinnipiac
-82.0% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

8%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
92%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#159
Defenseman overall
#42
Defenseman born in 2003
#398
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Lauren Kelly
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Dartmouth (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Marchin
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Yale (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Anna Kilponen
SMLIIGA-W · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Anna Wright
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Maine
0.40 No data
NCAAe PPG
Dani Sadek
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.46 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lauren Kelly
Dartmouth ·
0.208 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Taylor Marchin
Yale ·
0.207 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Anna Kilponen
North Dakota ·
0.257 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.