← New Search ↗ Social Card

Jordan Fader Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1997-01-28 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 NAHL 48 6 11 17 0.354 0.1315 0.1278 0.3750 0.3645
2017-18 Shreveport Mudbugs NAHL 60 16 29 45 0.750 0.2785 0.2570 0.7941 0.7327
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
2022-23 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D3 WIAC SR 30 4 14 18 0.600
2021-22 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D3 WIAC SR 27 15 17 32 1.185
2020-21 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D3 BigTen JR 11 3 2 5 0.455
2019-20 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D3 BigTen SO 28 4 7 11 0.393
2018-19 Wisconsin-Stevens Point D3 BigTen FR 14 7 1 8 0.571
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.57
2018-19 · Wisconsin-Stevens Point
+225.0% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

22%
NCAA D1
22%
NCAA D2/D3
52%
Age-Out / Club
0%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#18001
Forward overall
#743
Forward born in 1997
#1553
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Penn State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Average
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.02 PPG
→ Clarkson (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

SUNY Geneseo · 2007-08
0.583 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Framingham State · 2008-09
0.818 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Wisconsin-Superior · 2015-16
1.000 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.