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

Madeline Lane

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 North Yarmouth Academy NE-Prep-Girls 17 4 3 7 0.410 0.2544 0.2544 — —
2007-08 North Yarmouth Academy NE-Prep-Girls 24 10 9 19 0.790 0.4902 0.4902 — —
■ 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
2013-14 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC SR 17 2 6 8 0.471
2012-13 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC JR 15 1 2 3 0.200
2011-12 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC SO 26 3 5 8 0.308
2010-11 Bowdoin D3 NESCAC FR 26 3 9 12 0.462
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.37
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.46
2010-11 · Bowdoin
+23.5% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#394
Defenseman overall
#166
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

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)
0.33 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Anna Wright
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Maine
0.39 No data
NCAAe PPG
Anna Kilponen
SMLIIGA-W · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Christa Vuglar
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 1.00 PPG
→ RIT (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brie Larkowski
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2014-15
0.000 No data
actual D2/3 PPG
Natalie Bernstein
Williams · 2011-12
0.200 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Ava Stinnett
Saint Benedict · 2018-19
0.565 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.