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

Lexi Mara Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2007-02-27 Country: USA
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
2022-23 BB&N NE-Prep-Girls 28 0 1 1 0.040 0.0184 0.0184 — —
2023-24 BB&N NE-Prep-Girls 30 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2024-25 BB&N NE-Prep-Girls 30 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
■ 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 Northeastern D1 HEA-W — 24 0 1 1 0.042
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.02
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.04
2025-26 · Northeastern
+141.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

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

NCAAe Rankings

#8742
Defenseman overall
#760
Defenseman born in 2007
#1804
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Caroline Buckholtz
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.04 PPG
→ Brown
0.02 No data
NCAAe PPG
Natasha Rachlin
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.04 PPG
→ Harvard (0.09 D1 FR PPG)
0.02 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Hannah Schultz
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.12 PPG
→ Union (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.02 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Anna Erickson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.13 PPG
→ Vermont (0.03 D1 FR PPG)
0.02 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Paige Sorensen
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.09 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.01 Elite D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Caroline Buckholtz
Brown ·
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Natasha Rachlin
Harvard ·
0.088 Developing D
actual D2/3 PPG
Hannah Schultz
Union ·
0.267 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.