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

Carolyn Valentine

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
2009-10 Canterbury NE-Prep-Girls 25 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2010-11 Canterbury NE-Prep-Girls 16 7 1 8 0.500 0.3103 0.3103 — —
■ 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 Norwich D3 NEHC FR 5 1 3 4 0.800
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.27
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.80
2011-12 · Norwich
+201.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#6321
Forward overall
#408
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Mariah Gardner
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.40 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.07 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Abby Halluska
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.40 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Gabby Billing
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.40 PPG
→ Dartmouth (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Charly Dalhquist
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.40 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.24 D1 FR PPG)
0.22 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sara Hjalmarsson
SDHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Providence (0.66 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mollie Koch
Saint Mary's · 2024-25
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Ellie Burris
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2015-16
0.167 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Jada Ward
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2016-17
0.200 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.