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

Kaitlyn Toner 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
2023-24 Toronto Aeros U22 AA OWHL-U22 43 5 9 14 0.326 0.1138 0.1138 — —
2024-25 Toronto Aeros U22 AA OWHL-U22 45 1 12 13 0.289 0.1010 0.1010 — —
■ 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 — 35 0 2 2 0.057
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.09
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.06
2025-26 · Union
-37.2% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

2%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
92%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#7630
Forward overall
#525
in OWHL-U22

D1 Comparables

Joie Phelps
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ Cornell (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kourtney Menches
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 0.34 PPG
→ Vermont (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Mac Johnson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Abby Halluska
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Rebecca Freiburger
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.28 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Joie Phelps
Cornell ·
0.182 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Kourtney Menches
Vermont ·
0.083 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Mac Johnson
St. Cloud State ·
0.125 Developing
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.