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

Carson Barnes Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Goalie DOB: 2004-01-15 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%
2024-25 — NAHL 44 11 23 88.6% 3.92 0 0.9843 78.5%
2023-24 — OJHL 27 17 5 91.2% 2.41 0 0.9700 82.2%
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 New England D3 1 — — 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
Lukas Renaud AJHL 92.4% 77.8% Long Island Univ. 89.7% 2.57
Jack LaFontaine BCHL 92.3% 80.1% Minnesota 91.9% 2.55
Jacob Zacharewicz NAHL 89.2% 79.5% Brown 86.8% 4.19
Daniel Hauser WHL 91.3% 76.6% Wisconsin 90.0% 2.49
Luke Lush AJHL 91.9% 77.5% Sacred Heart 91.5% 2.11
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
Nic Tallarico NOJHL 92.1% 78.5% Adrian D3 90.1% 2.46
Marcus Cumberworth AJHL 88.7% 77.7% Buffalo State D3 90.8% 3.33
Brian Tallieu USPHL-Premier 91.3% 77.8% Lawrence D3 88.6% 4.50
Graham Burke NAHL 86.2% 78.7% Hobart D3 95.1% 1.00
Grant Linville NCDC 88.9% 79.2% SUNY Morrisville D3 88.3% 3.95

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.