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

Danica Maynard Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2007-03-19 Country: Canada
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
2021-22 — CSSHL-U18W 29 15 19 34 1.172 0.2686 0.2686 — —
2022-23 Okanagan HA U18 Prep CSSHL-U18W 29 6 21 27 0.931 0.2133 0.2133 — —
2023-24 RINK HA Kelowna U18 Prep CSSHL-U18W 30 15 31 46 1.533 0.3513 0.3513 — —
2024-25 RINK HA Kelowna U18 Prep CSSHL-U18W 29 10 36 46 1.586 0.3634 0.3634 — —
■ 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 Penn State D1 WCHA-W — 39 9 24 33 0.846
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.34
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.85
2025-26 · Penn State
+150.0% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

0%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
95%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#266
Defenseman overall
#37
Defenseman born in 2007
#20
in CSSHL-U18W

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
Briana Mastel
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 1.04 PPG
→ Harvard (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average 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.