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

Nicole Palazzo

Position: Defense 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 Westminster NE-Prep-Girls 22 2 5 7 0.320 0.1472 0.1472 — —
2007-08 Westminster NE-Prep-Girls 22 11 8 19 0.860 0.3957 0.3957 — —
■ 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 Sacred Heart D1 NEWHA SR 29 17 13 30 1.034
2010-11 Sacred Heart D1 NEWHA JR 29 17 13 30 1.034
2009-10 Sacred Heart D1 NEWHA SO 28 3 13 16 0.571
2008-09 Sacred Heart D1 NEWHA FR 10 0 7 7 0.700
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.28
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.70
2008-09 · Sacred Heart
+150.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#363
Defenseman overall
#163
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Anna Wright
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Maine
0.40 No data
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Marchin
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Yale (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Lauren Kelly
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.73 PPG
→ Dartmouth (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Briana Mastel
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 1.04 PPG
→ Harvard (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.48 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Anna Kilponen
SMLIIGA-W · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Anna Wright
Maine ·
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Taylor Marchin
Yale ·
0.207 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Lauren Kelly
Dartmouth ·
0.208 Average 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.