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

Ashleigh Kowtoniuk

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 Taft NE-Prep-Girls 22 7 11 18 0.820 0.5088 0.5088 — —
2006-07 Taft NE-Prep-Girls 19 9 5 14 0.740 0.4592 0.4592 — —
2007-08 Taft NE-Prep-Girls 22 2 4 6 0.270 0.1675 0.1675 — —
■ 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
2010-11 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC JR 18 2 5 7 0.389
2009-10 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC SO 22 7 6 13 0.591
2008-09 Connecticut College D3 NESCAC FR 25 5 9 14 0.560
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.24
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.56
2008-09 · Connecticut College
+130.2% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#2926
Forward overall
#208
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Liz Schepers
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.12 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Average
NCAAe PPG
Grace Zumwinkle
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (1.00 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Elite
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Chancellor
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.08 PPG
→ Yale (0.52 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Average
NCAAe PPG
Sierra Semmel
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Maine
0.16 No data
NCAAe PPG
Natalie Snodgrass
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.20 PPG
→ UConn (1.00 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Elite
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Liz Schepers
Ohio State ·
0.410 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Grace Zumwinkle
Minnesota ·
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan Chancellor
Yale ·
0.517 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.