← New Search ↗ Social Card

Carson Dorfman Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Goalie DOB: 2003-10-06 Country: USA
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

Save % Equivalency
Goals Against Average
Base SV%
Year Adj
Source
Confidence

NCAA D3 / D2

Save % Equivalency
Goals Against Average
Base SV%
Year Adj
Source
Confidence
Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw SV%  ·  Solid blue = age-adj SVe%  ·  Green = actual college SV%
Goalie Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP W L SV% GAA SO SVe Factor Age-Adj SV%
2023-24 NAHL 12 6 5 90.1% 2.78 0 0.9843 86.6%
2023-24 Sioux City Musketeers USHL 1 0 0 100.0% 0 0.9983 94.1%
2022-23 NAHL 23 12 8 91.2% 2.37 1 0.9843 90.8%
SVe Factor = save% equivalency relative to NCAA D1 average  ·  COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div GP W L SV% GAA SO
2025-26 RPI D1 3 0 1 87.7% 4.41 0
2024-25 RPI D1 1 0 0 100.0% 0
Goalie Comparables (D1)

Historical goalies with similar age-adjusted SVe profiles who went on to play NCAA D1.

Name Junior League Junior SV% Adj SVe College NCAA SV% NCAA GAA
Rorke Applebee BCHL 90.2% 86.5% Lake Superior State 90.7% 3.00
Liam Beerman USHL 91.2% 85.7% Lindenwood 90.3% 3.24
Ben Charette AJHL 92.5% 86.0% Harvard 90.9% 2.77
Matthew DellaRusso NAHL 89.6% 86.1% Northeastern 66.7% 21.30
Brandon Perrone NAHL 91.2% 87.4% Alaska Anchorage 87.2% 3.66
Goalie Comparables (D2/D3)

Historical goalies with similar age-adjusted SVe profiles who went on to play NCAA D2/D3.

Name Junior League Junior SV% Adj SVe College Div SV% GAA
Conor Sullivan NAHL 88.2% 87.2% Middlebury D3 92.1% 2.46
Jack McGovern CCHL 90.2% 86.7% Wentworth D3 90.2% 3.16
Connor Graham MJHL 89.9% 87.2% Alvernia D3 93.2% 2.19
Eric Daniel USPHL-Premier 92.0% 85.7% King's D3 86.9% 6.55
Dario Cantini OJHL 89.8% 87.7% Lebanon Valley D3 86.1% 5.00

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.