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

Brooklyn Nimegeers Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2006-01-10 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
2020-21 Regina Rebels SFMAAAHL-W 0 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2021-22 Regina Rebels SFMAAAHL-W 30 5 21 26 0.867 0.2027 0.2027 — —
2022-23 Regina Rebels SFMAAAHL-W 29 11 18 29 1.000 0.2339 0.2339 — —
2023-24 Regina Rebels SFMAAAHL-W 28 10 30 40 1.429 0.3341 0.3341 — —
■ 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 Princeton D1 ECAC-W — 34 2 3 5 0.147
2024-25 Princeton D1 ECAC-W — 29 2 3 5 0.172
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.28
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.17
2024-25 · Princeton
-37.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

18%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
82%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#447
Defenseman overall
#90
Defenseman born in 2006
#16
in SFMAAAHL-W

D1 Comparables

Lauren Kelly
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Dartmouth (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Marchin
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Yale (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Anna Kilponen
SMLIIGA-W · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Anna Wright
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Maine
0.40 No data
NCAAe PPG
Christa Vuglar
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 1.00 PPG
→ RIT (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Lauren Kelly
Dartmouth ·
0.208 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Taylor Marchin
Yale ·
0.207 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Anna Kilponen
North Dakota ·
0.257 Average 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.