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

Molly Strabley

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
2008-09 North Yarmouth Academy NE-Prep-Girls 26 6 8 14 0.540 0.2485 0.2485 — —
2009-10 North Yarmouth Academy NE-Prep-Girls 25 1 0 1 0.040 0.0184 0.0184 — —
2012-13 Loomis Chaffee NE-Prep-Girls 23 5 6 11 0.480 0.2208 0.2208 — —
■ 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 Princeton D1 ECAC-W SR 33 3 9 12 0.364
2015-16 Princeton D1 ECAC-W JR 33 2 9 11 0.333
2014-15 Princeton D1 ECAC-W SO 31 0 5 5 0.161
2013-14 Princeton D1 ECAC-W FR 29 0 3 3 0.103
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.10
2013-14 · Princeton
-13.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#5054
Forward overall
#338
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Sena Hanson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.36 PPG
→ Brown (0.63 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Savannah Quandt
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.36 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Mariah Gardner
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.40 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.07 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
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
Savannah Quandt
Minnesota ·
0.111 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Mariah Gardner
Minnesota ·
0.071 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.