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

Emma Yates 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
2022-23 Nepean Wildcats OWHL-U22 43 11 13 24 0.558 0.1951 0.1951 — —
2023-24 Mississauga Hurricanes U22 OWHL-U22 43 5 11 16 0.372 0.1301 0.1301 — —
■ 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 Brown D1 ECAC-W — 30 0 0 0 0.000
2024-25 Brown D1 ECAC-W — 30 0 2 2 0.067
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.07
2024-25 · Brown
-50.1% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

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

NCAAe Rankings

#5275
Forward overall
#313
in OWHL-U22

D1 Comparables

Amanda Bäckebo
SDHL · 2012-13 · 0.11 PPG
→ Syracuse (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Vilma Tanskanen
SMLIIGA-W · 2012-13 · 0.35 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Tianna Gunderson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Renee Saltness
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.03 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Holly Dietzler
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.84 PPG
→ Lindenwood (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Amanda Bäckebo
Syracuse ·
0.056 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Vilma Tanskanen
North Dakota ·
0.182 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Tianna Gunderson
Minnesota ·
0.069 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.