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

Charlotte Pieckenhagen Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2006-01-18 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 Ridley College OWHL-U22 11 7 7 14 1.273 0.4449 0.4449 — —
2022-23 Mississauga Hurricanes U22 OWHL-U22 35 23 26 49 1.400 0.4894 0.4894 — —
2023-24 Burlington Barracudas AA OWHL-U22 31 12 20 32 1.032 0.3609 0.3609 — —
2024-25 Mississauga Hurricanes U22 OWHL-U22 37 39 22 61 1.649 0.5764 0.5764 — —
■ 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 Wisconsin D1 WCHA-W FR 40 5 9 14 0.350
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.42
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.35
2025-26 · Wisconsin
-16.6% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

45%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
52%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#690
Forward overall
#23
Forward born in 2006
#21
in OWHL-U22

D1 Comparables

Andrea Renner
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 2.00 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.58 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ivy Dynek
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 1.92 PPG
→ St. Cloud State
0.56 No data
NCAAe PPG
Lauren Abbenante
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 1.30 PPG
→ Holy Cross (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.60 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Kelly Pannek
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 3.45 PPG
→ Minnesota (1.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.55 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Nicole Schammel
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 3.44 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.55 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Andrea Renner
Northeastern ·
0.167 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Ivy Dynek
St. Cloud State ·
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Lauren Abbenante
Holy Cross ·
0.607 Average
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.