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

Angelina DiGirolamo Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2005-06-03 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
2017-18 Boston Shamrocks U16 JWHL-U16 7 2 0 2 0.286 0.0544 0.0615 — —
2019-20 Woburn Memorial High USHS-W 19 38 9 47 2.474 0.7201 0.7201 — —
■ 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 Princeton D1 ECAC-W — 34 6 7 13 0.382
2024-25 Princeton D1 ECAC-W — 32 6 13 19 0.594
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.59
2024-25 · Princeton
+1028.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 1 comparables)

0%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
100%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#208
Forward overall
#3
Forward born in 2005

D1 Comparables

Sierra Smith
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.40 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.06 No data
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Heise
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.90 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Laura Anderson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Yale (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Presley Norby
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average
NCAAe PPG
Mallorie Iozzo
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Sierra Smith
Minnesota ·
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Taylor Heise
Minnesota ·
0.897 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Laura Anderson
Yale ·
0.290 Developing
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.