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

Sophia Kunin Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1997-04-03 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
2011-12 Wayzata High (W) USHS-MN-W 25 6 12 18 0.720 0.1156 0.1156 — —
2012-13 Wayzata High (W) USHS-MN-W 25 7 9 16 0.640 0.1028 0.1028 — —
2013-14 Wayzata High (W) USHS-MN-W 24 17 22 39 1.625 0.2610 0.2610 — —
2014-15 Wayzata High (W) USHS-MN-W 16 13 6 19 1.188 0.1907 0.1907 — —
■ 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
2018-19 Wisconsin D1 — — 41 7 14 21 0.512
2017-18 Wisconsin D1 WCHA-W — 35 12 12 24 0.686
2016-17 Wisconsin D1 WCHA-W — 38 3 15 18 0.474
2015-16 Wisconsin D1 WCHA-W — 40 7 10 17 0.425
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.42
2015-16 · Wisconsin
+126.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#4115
Forward overall
#153
Forward born in 1997
#678
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

Natalie Snodgrass
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.20 PPG
→ UConn (1.00 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Liz Schepers
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.12 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average
NCAAe PPG
Danielle Marmer
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Quinnipiac
0.18 No data
NCAAe PPG
Madison Woo
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.36 PPG
→ Brown (0.52 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average
NCAAe PPG
Grace Zumwinkle
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (1.00 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Elite
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Natalie Snodgrass
UConn ·
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Liz Schepers
Ohio State ·
0.410 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Danielle Marmer
Quinnipiac ·
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.