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

Mackenzie Lee

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 Williston Northampton NE-Prep-Girls 23 2 0 2 0.090 0.0558 0.0558 — —
2007-08 Williston Northampton NE-Prep-Girls 22 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 SUNY Oswego D3 — SR 27 10 8 18 0.667
2010-11 SUNY Oswego D3 — JR 25 14 9 23 0.920
2009-10 Plattsburgh D3 — SO 18 4 4 8 0.444
2009-10 SUNY Plattsburgh D3 — SO 18 4 4 8 0.444
2008-09 Plattsburgh D3 — FR 17 2 2 4 0.235
2008-09 SUNY Plattsburgh D3 — FR 17 2 2 4 0.235
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.05
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.24
2008-09 · Plattsburgh
+392.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#15906
Forward overall
#1458
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Taylor Heise
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.90 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Laura Anderson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Yale (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sierra Smith
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.40 PPG
→ Minnesota
0.06 No data
NCAAe PPG
Presley Norby
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Average
NCAAe PPG
Mallory Rushton
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.07 PPG
→ RIT (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.04 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Taylor Heise
Minnesota ·
0.897 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Laura Anderson
Yale ·
0.290 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Sierra Smith
Minnesota ·
0.000 No data
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.