← New Search ↗ Social Card

Carter Randklev Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-11-05 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
2016-17 Fargo Force USHL 1 0 0 0 0.000
2017-18 Fargo Force USHL 14 2 7 9 0.643 0.3792 0.3905 1.9309 1.9887
2018-19 Fargo Force USHL 21 3 8 11 0.524 0.3090 0.3023 1.5732 1.5391
2019-20 Fargo Force USHL 44 9 6 15 0.341 0.2011 0.2011 1.0239 1.0239
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
2024-25 Bemidji State D1 CCHA 18 4 2 6 0.333
2023-24 Niagara D1 AHA SR 37 11 20 31 0.838
2022-23 Niagara D1 AHA JR 38 13 11 24 0.632
2021-22 Niagara D1 AHA SO 22 6 2 8 0.364
2020-21 Niagara D1 AHA FR 13 3 2 5 0.385
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.29
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.38
2020-21 · Niagara
+33.1% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

72%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
12%
Age-Out / Club
12%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#17261
Forward overall
#831
Forward born in 1999
#1674
in USHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.32 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.56 PPG
→ Dartmouth (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Michigan State (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.92 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.39 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ St. Cloud State (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

UMass Dartmouth · 2021-22
1.125 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
St. Thomas · 2014-15
0.923 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
University of New England · 2018-19
1.667 Elite
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.