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

Suvi Ollikainen Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1995-03-06 Country: Finland
Signed Professionally
KJT Haukat · SMLIIGA-W

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 Team Kuortane SMLIIGA-W 16 4 5 9 0.562 0.2133 0.2133 — —
2012-13 Team Kuortane SMLIIGA-W 28 3 6 9 0.321 0.1219 0.1219 — —
2013-14 Team Kuortane SMLIIGA-W 26 4 5 9 0.346 0.1313 0.1313 — —
2014-15 KJT Haukat SMLIIGA-W 28 5 9 14 0.500 0.1896 0.1896 — —
■ 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 St. Cloud State D1 WCHA-W SR 37 1 1 2 0.054
2017-18 St. Cloud State D1 WCHA-W JR 33 0 0 0 0.000
2016-17 St. Cloud State D1 WCHA-W SO 34 0 3 3 0.088
2015-16 St. Cloud State D1 WCHA-W FR 33 2 3 5 0.151
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.15
2015-16 · St. Cloud State
+6.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#5312
Forward overall
#142
Forward born in 1995
#215
in SMLIIGA-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
Grace Zumwinkle
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (1.00 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Chancellor
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.08 PPG
→ Yale (0.52 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
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.