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

Amanda Kimmerle Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense 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 Anoka High (women) USHS-MN-W 24 0 3 3 0.125 0.0201 0.0201 — —
2011-12 Anoka High (women) USHS-MN-W 25 1 6 7 0.280 0.0450 0.0450 — —
2012-13 Anoka High (women) USHS-MN-W 25 6 9 15 0.600 0.0964 0.0964 — —
2013-14 Anoka High (women) USHS-MN-W 25 2 10 12 0.480 0.0771 0.0771 — —
■ 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 RPI D1 — — 34 1 6 7 0.206
2016-17 RPI D1 ECAC-W — 36 1 8 9 0.250
2015-16 RPI D1 ECAC-W — 34 2 4 6 0.176
2014-15 RPI D1 — — 34 0 2 2 0.059
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.06
2014-15 · RPI
-26.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3731
Defenseman overall
#3093
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

Kelsey Crow
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Penn State (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Tristen Truax
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.07 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Emma Turbyville
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Jessica Adolfsson
SDHL · 2012-13 · 0.06 PPG
→ Penn State (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.07 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Lauren Boyle
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Kelsey Crow
Penn State ·
0.160 Developing D
actual D2/3 PPG
Tristen Truax
Minnesota ·
0.167 Developing D
actual D2/3 PPG
Emma Turbyville
St. Cloud State ·
0.040 Developing 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.