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

Erin Davey

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
2005-06 Proctor NE-Prep-Girls 29 20 10 30 1.030 0.6391 0.6391 — —
■ 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
2009-10 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC SR 23 7 1 8 0.348
2008-09 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC JR 26 14 3 17 0.654
2007-08 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC SO 25 5 2 7 0.280
2006-07 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC FR 23 7 5 12 0.522
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.59
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.52
2006-07 · Connecticut College
-12.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#804
Forward overall
#68
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Nicole Schammel
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 4.16 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.63 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jessie Aney
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 4.36 PPG
→ UConn (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.66 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Andrea Renner
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 2.00 PPG
→ Northeastern (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.60 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Nicole Guagliardo
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 2.27 PPG
→ Mercyhurst (0.16 D1 FR PPG)
0.68 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ivy Dynek
USHS-W · 2012-13 · 1.92 PPG
→ St. Cloud State
0.58 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Nicole Schammel
Minnesota State ·
0.611 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jessie Aney
UConn ·
0.267 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrea Renner
Northeastern ·
0.167 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.