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

Lindsay Roethke 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 Buffalo High USHS-MN-W 25 12 16 28 1.120 0.1799 0.1799 — —
2011-12 Buffalo High USHS-MN-W 25 18 25 43 1.720 0.2762 0.2762 — —
2012-13 Buffalo High USHS-MN-W 25 17 32 49 1.960 0.3148 0.3148 — —
2013-14 Buffalo High USHS-MN-W 25 13 25 38 1.520 0.2441 0.2441 — —
■ 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
2017-18 UConn D1 HEA-W — 39 0 1 1 0.026
2016-17 UConn D1 HEA-W — 36 1 4 5 0.139
2015-16 UConn D1 HEA-W — 37 0 1 1 0.027
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.23
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.03
2015-16 · UConn
-88.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#2436
Forward overall
#249
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

Danielle Marmer
19U-AAA-W · 2012-13 · 0.70 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sydney Brodt
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.54 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Brooklynn Schugel
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.54 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kiki Radke
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.58 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Brooke Madsen
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.60 PPG
→ Penn State (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Danielle Marmer
Quinnipiac ·
0.108 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Sydney Brodt
Minnesota Duluth ·
0.600 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Brooklynn Schugel
Minnesota Duluth ·
0.270 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.