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

Maude Poulin-Labelle Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1999-11-23 Country: Canada
Signed Professionally
Brynäs IF · SDHL

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
2024-25 Brynäs IF SDHL 17 4 12 16 0.941 1.0871 0.9968 — —
2025-26 Brynäs IF SDHL 23 1 7 8 0.348 0.4017 0.3530 — —
■ 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
2022-23 Northeastern D1 HEA-W — 38 4 18 22 0.579
2021-22 Vermont D1 — SR 34 13 22 35 1.029
2020-21 Vermont D1 — JR 11 1 8 9 0.818
2019-20 Vermont D1 — SO 36 12 17 29 0.806
2018-19 Vermont D1 — FR 36 5 6 11 0.306

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

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

NCAAe Rankings

#25
Defenseman overall
#16
Defenseman born in 1999
#96
in SDHL

D1 Comparables

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

Taylor Marchin
Yale ·
0.207 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Lauren Kelly
Dartmouth ·
0.208 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Anna Wright
Maine ·
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.