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

Anna Erickson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1998-12-29 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
2012-13 Mahtomedi High USHS-MN-W 23 1 2 3 0.130 0.0209 0.0209 — —
2013-14 Mahtomedi High USHS-MN-W 26 4 6 10 0.385 0.0618 0.0618 — —
■ 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
2020-21 Vermont D1 — — 9 1 2 3 0.333
2019-20 Vermont D1 — — 36 0 4 4 0.111
2018-19 Vermont D1 — — 36 1 7 8 0.222
2017-18 Vermont D1 HEA-W — 33 0 1 1 0.030
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.04
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.03
2017-18 · Vermont
-29.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#5446
Defenseman overall
#382
Defenseman born in 1998
#4836
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

Lauren Niska
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth
0.06 No data
NCAAe PPG
Abby Ecker
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.42 PPG
→ Bemidji State
0.07 No data
NCAAe PPG
Kate Glover
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.35 PPG
→ Harvard (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Jackson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.44 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.07 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Jessica Adolfsson
SDHL · 2012-13 · 0.06 PPG
→ Penn State (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.07 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lauren Niska
Minnesota Duluth ·
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Abby Ecker
Bemidji State ·
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Kate Glover
Harvard ·
0.167 Developing 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.