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

Ashley Bonner

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 Canterbury NE-Prep-Girls 18 3 1 4 0.220 0.1365 0.1365 — —
2008-09 Canterbury NE-Prep-Girls 28 2 1 3 0.110 0.0683 0.0683 — —
2009-10 Canterbury NE-Prep-Girls 25 0 2 2 0.080 0.0496 0.0496 — —
2010-11 Canterbury NE-Prep-Girls 16 7 7 14 0.880 0.5460 0.5460 — —
■ 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 New England College D3 NEHC SR 25 3 2 5 0.200
2013-14 New England College D3 NEHC JR 26 2 1 3 0.115
2012-13 New England College D3 NEHC SO 24 2 4 6 0.250
2011-12 New England College D3 NEHC FR 25 3 4 7 0.280
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.30
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.28
2011-12 · New England College
-5.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3871
Forward overall
#259
in NE-Prep-Girls

D1 Comparables

Darby Dodds
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.43 PPG
→ Lindenwood
0.39 No data
NCAAe PPG
Katie Rooney
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.52 PPG
→ RPI (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Corbin Boyd
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 2.42 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Lauren Hespenheide
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 2.40 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Rebecca Lindblad
USHS-W · 2013-14 · 1.43 PPG
→ UConn (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.42 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Megan Dulong
Wisconsin-Superior · 2014-15
0.407 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Courtney Moser
Saint Mary's (MN) · 2014-15
0.560 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Paige Hanson
Concordia · 2018-19
0.000 No data
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.