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

Shannon Farrell

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
2010-11 Berwick NE-Prep-Girls 15 19 13 32 2.130 1.3217 1.3217 — —
2011-12 Berwick NE-Prep-Girls 18 20 12 32 1.780 1.1045 1.1045 — —
■ 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
2015-16 Trinity D3 NESCAC SR 26 14 6 20 0.769
2014-15 Trinity D3 NESCAC JR 27 9 14 23 0.852
2013-14 Trinity D3 NESCAC SO 18 3 6 9 0.500
2012-13 Trinity D3 NESCAC FR 24 4 3 7 0.292
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
1.27
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.29
2012-13 · Trinity
-77.1% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#108
Forward overall
#9
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Brooke Avery
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 2.00 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
1.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Theresa Knutson
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 3.95 PPG
→ UConn (0.39 D1 FR PPG)
1.09 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brooke Avery
New Hampshire ·
0.062 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Theresa Knutson
UConn ·
0.389 Average
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.