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

Nathan Taurence Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1989-05-24 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
2007-08 Bismarck Bobcats NAHL 55 4 6 10 0.182 0.0646 0.0665 0.1909 0.1965
2008-09 Motor City Machine NAHL 55 4 12 16 0.291 0.1033 0.1012 0.3054 0.2992
2009-10 Marquette Rangers NAHL 57 5 9 14 0.246 0.0872 0.0819 0.2579 0.2423
■ 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
2013-14 Northern Michigan D1 WCHA JR 23 0 1 1 0.043
2012-13 Northern Michigan D1 — JR 10 0 2 2 0.200
2010-11 St. Scholastica D3 — FR 17 3 2 5 0.294
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.29
2010-11 · St. Scholastica
+247.6% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#17420
Defenseman overall
#1578
Defenseman born in 1989
#5343
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Krug
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.21 PPG
→ Union (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
William Eiserman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ UMass Lowell (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.08 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Dylan Meier
Augsburg · 2012-13
0.560 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jack Brown
Bethel · 2021-22
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Spencer Sasenbury
Canton · 2024-25
0.846 Strong
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.