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

Christian Tavare Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-02-15 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
2019-20 Eau Claire Memorial (Wis.) USHS-MN 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2022-23 Minnesota Moose NA3HL 44 12 15 27 0.614 0.0679 0.0693 0.1944 0.1984
2023-24 Odessa Jackalopes NAHL 35 6 5 11 0.314 0.1116 0.1100 0.3300 0.3252
2024-25 Odessa Jackalopes NAHL 57 11 17 28 0.491 0.1745 0.1628 0.5157 0.4812
■ 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
2025-26 Bethel D3 MIAC FR 7 0 0 0 0.000

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

25%
NCAA D1
35%
NCAA D2/D3
38%
Age-Out / Club
2%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#34821
Forward overall
#2119
Forward born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Steven Quagliata
Wisconsin-Stevens Point · 2016-17
0.577 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Paul Vella
Skidmore · 2016-17
0.478 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Rowbotham
Amherst · 2010-11
0.640 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.