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

Savannah Quandt Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin 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
2010-11 Mankato East High (W) USHS-MN-W 24 28 20 48 2.000 0.3212 0.3212 — —
2011-12 Mankato East High (W) USHS-MN-W 21 28 14 42 2.000 0.3212 0.3212 — —
2012-13 Mankato East High (W) USHS-MN-W 25 15 19 34 1.360 0.2184 0.2184 — —
■ 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
2016-17 Minnesota D1 WCHA-W — 37 1 1 2 0.054
2015-16 Minnesota D1 WCHA-W — 36 3 1 4 0.111
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.22
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.11
2015-16 · Minnesota
-50.0% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#2426
Forward overall
#247
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

Sena Hanson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.36 PPG
→ Brown (0.63 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Molly Strabley
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Princeton (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sydney Brodt
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.32 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Mariah Gardner
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.40 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sara Hjalmarsson
SDHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Providence (0.66 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Sena Hanson
Brown ·
0.630 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Molly Strabley
Princeton ·
0.103 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Sydney Brodt
Minnesota Duluth ·
0.600 Average
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.