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

Emma Fulawka Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin 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 Mississauga Hurricanes U22 OWHL-U22 21 2 4 6 0.286 0.0999 0.0999 — —
2022-23 Mississauga Hurricanes U22 OWHL-U22 32 13 11 24 0.750 0.2622 0.2622 — —
■ 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 Union D1 ECAC-W — 34 5 7 12 0.353
2024-25 Union D1 ECAC-W — 18 2 3 5 0.278
2023-24 Union D1 ECAC-W — 32 4 3 7 0.219
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.22
2023-24 · Union
+29.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

12%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
85%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#4041
Forward overall
#226
in OWHL-U22

D1 Comparables

Melissa Haganey
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Carly Radovich
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Sacred Heart (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Williamson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.64 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.40 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Average
NCAAe PPG
Emily Gunderson
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.64 PPG
→ Lindenwood (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Brooke Madsen
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.60 PPG
→ Penn State (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Melissa Haganey
Northeastern ·
0.143 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Carly Radovich
Sacred Heart ·
0.042 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Taylor Williamson
Minnesota ·
0.395 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.