icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG | NCAAe-PPG | Age-Adj | D3e-PPG | Age-Adj |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010-11 | Elk River/Zimmerman (women) | USHS-MN-W | 25 | 39 | 23 | 62 | 2.480 | 0.3983 | 0.3823 | — | — |
| 2011-12 | Elk River/Zimmerman (women) | USHS-MN-W | 25 | 34 | 24 | 58 | 2.320 | 0.3726 | 0.3414 | — | — |
| 2018-19 | Minnesota Whitecaps | PHF | 16 | 8 | 11 | 19 | 1.188 | — | — | — | — |
| 2019-20 | Minnesota Whitecaps | PHF | 21 | 14 | 22 | 36 | 1.714 | — | — | — | — |
| 2020-21 | Minnesota Whitecaps | PHF | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.250 | — | — | — | — |
| 2021-22 | Minnesota Whitecaps | PHF | 20 | 9 | 15 | 24 | 1.200 | — | — | — | — |
| 2022-23 | Minnesota Whitecaps | PHF | 24 | 10 | 10 | 20 | 0.833 | — | — | — | — |
| 2023-24 | Minnesota Whitecaps | PHF | 24 | 10 | 10 | 20 | 0.833 | — | — | — | — |
| 2024-25 | Minnesota Whitecaps | PHF | 24 | 10 | 10 | 20 | 0.833 | — | — | — | — |
| 2025-26 | Minnesota Whitecaps | PHF | 24 | 10 | 10 | 20 | 0.833 | — | — | — | — |
| Season | School | Div | Conference | Year | GP | G | A | Pts | PPG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016-17 | New Hampshire | D1 | HEA-W | — | 35 | 21 | 21 | 42 | 1.200 |
| 2015-16 | New Hampshire | D1 | HEA-W | — | 36 | 16 | 17 | 33 | 0.917 |
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.