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

Grace Rentmeester Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2005-12-16 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
2020-21 Fox Cities Stars USHS-W 19 33 32 65 3.421 0.9959 0.9959 — —
2021-22 Team Wisconsin 16U AAA 16U-AAA-W 33 20 15 35 1.061 0.4273 0.4211 — —
2022-23 Culver Military Academy USHS-W 53 33 32 65 1.226 0.3570 0.3439 — —
■ 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 Lindenwood D1 WCHA-W — 32 1 2 3 0.094
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.32
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.09
2025-26 · Lindenwood
-70.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

15%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
85%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#552
Forward overall
#11
Forward born in 2005
#182
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Taylor Williamson
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.14 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.40 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average
NCAAe PPG
Haley Mack
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.16 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG
Emily Bergland
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.16 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Corbin Boyd
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.16 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Brittany Wheeler
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.16 PPG
→ Yale (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Taylor Williamson
Minnesota ·
0.395 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Haley Mack
Bemidji State ·
0.371 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Emily Bergland
Bemidji State ·
0.114 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.