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

Carter Wagner Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1999-12-31 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
2017-18 Minnesota Magicians NAHL 8 4 2 6 0.750 0.2756 0.2945 0.7916 0.8460
2018-19 — NAHL 29 1 4 5 0.172 0.0633 0.0648 0.1820 0.1864
2019-20 North Iowa Bulls NA3HL 37 18 14 32 0.865 0.1085 0.1085 — —
■ 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
2021-22 Bethel D3 MIAC — 14 3 4 7 0.500
2020-21 Bethel D1 MIAC FR 8 5 2 7 0.875
2020-21 Bethel D3 MIAC — 8 5 2 7 0.875
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.13
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.88
2020-21 · Bethel
+552.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

18%
NCAA D1
10%
NCAA D2/D3
5%
Age-Out / Club
68%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#35827
Forward overall
#1948
Forward born in 1999
#3613
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Tim Lappin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Brown (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average
NCAAe PPG
Sebastian Weberg
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.23 PPG
→ Colgate
0.13 No data
NCAAe PPG
Seth Adams
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.26 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Canon Pieper
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.28 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.08 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing
NCAAe PPG
David Parrottino
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.14 PPG
→ Canisius
0.08 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brendan Vetter
Lawrence · 2012-13
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrew Poulias
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2017-18
0.250 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Cody Braga
Southern Maine · 2015-16
0.375 Average
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.