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

Cara Jankowski

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
2007-08 Exeter NE-Prep-Girls 22 9 8 17 0.770 0.4778 0.4778 — —
2008-09 Exeter NE-Prep-Girls 26 7 12 19 0.730 0.4530 0.4530 — —
■ 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
2014-15 Wesleyan D3 NESCAC SR 9 3 4 7 0.778
2013-14 Wesleyan D3 NESCAC JR 8 0 2 2 0.250
2012-13 Wesleyan D3 NESCAC SO 22 6 9 15 0.682
2011-12 Wesleyan D3 NESCAC FR 11 2 3 5 0.455
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.40
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.46
2011-12 · Wesleyan
+14.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#1649
Forward overall
#125
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Emily Bergland
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.04 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Catherine Skaja
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.34 D1 FR PPG)
0.33 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Rebekah Kolstad
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.09 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sylvia Marolt
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.12 PPG
→ Bemidji State
0.34 No data
NCAAe PPG
Demi Gardner
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.12 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.25 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Sophia Zebro
Saint Mary's · 2015-16
0.346 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Emily Bauer
Wisconsin-Eau Claire · 2014-15
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Mikayla Kelley
Franklin Pierce · 2018-19
0.469 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.