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

Kelly Foley

Position: Forward DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin Country: ?
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
2006-07 Tabor NE-Prep-Girls 26 0 4 4 0.150 0.0690 0.0690 — —
2007-08 Tabor NE-Prep-Girls 24 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
■ 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
2011-12 Dartmouth D1 ECAC-W SR 30 16 18 34 1.133
2010-11 Dartmouth D1 ECAC-W JR 34 17 14 31 0.912
2009-10 Dartmouth D1 ECAC-W SO 15 3 9 12 0.800
2008-09 Dartmouth D1 ECAC-W FR 34 12 13 25 0.735
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.06
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.74
2008-09 · Dartmouth
+1144.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#13952
Forward overall
#1181
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Sierra Smith
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.40 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.06 No data
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Heise
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.90 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Mallorie Iozzo
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Laura Anderson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Yale (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.06 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Presley Norby
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Sierra Smith
Minnesota ·
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Taylor Heise
Minnesota ·
0.897 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Mallorie Iozzo
Minnesota Duluth ·
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.