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

Elizabeth Tabaka Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: ⚠ Missing — add in admin Country: USA
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
2010-11 Tartan Senior High USHS-MN-W 19 7 6 13 0.684 0.1033 0.1033 — —
2011-12 Tartan Senior High USHS-MN-W 24 11 9 20 0.833 0.1258 0.1258 — —
2012-13 Tartan Senior High USHS-MN-W 25 21 12 33 1.320 0.1993 0.1993 — —
2013-14 Tartan Senior High USHS-MN-W 24 19 12 31 1.292 0.1950 0.1950 — —
2014-15 Tartan Senior High USHS-MN-W 25 19 13 32 1.280 0.1933 0.1933 — —
■ 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
2019-20 Augsburg D3 MIAC — 27 4 6 10 0.370
2018-19 Augsburg D3 MIAC — 26 3 13 16 0.615
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.62
2018-19 · Augsburg
+270.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3767
Forward overall
#545
in USHS-MN-W

D1 Comparables

Sydney Brodt
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.32 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Jackie Pieper
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.32 PPG
→ Merrimack (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Sena Hanson
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.36 PPG
→ Brown (0.63 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Savannah Quandt
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.36 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Developing
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

Sydney Brodt
Minnesota Duluth ·
0.600 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jackie Pieper
Merrimack ·
0.324 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Sena Hanson
Brown ·
0.630 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.