← New Search ↗ Social Card

Dawson Good Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2002-04-17 Country: Canada
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
2018-19 Chilliwack Chiefs BCHL 2 0 1 1 0.500 0.1926 0.2157 0.7277 0.8150
2019-20 Chilliwack Chiefs BCHL 5 2 0 2 0.400 0.1541 0.1541 0.5821 0.5821
2020-21 Chilliwack Chiefs BCHL 20 4 6 10 0.500 0.1926 0.1926 0.7277 0.7277
2021-22 Chilliwack Chiefs BCHL 51 18 37 55 1.078 0.4155 0.4028 1.5694 1.5213
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 Vermont D1 HockeyEast SR 34 2 4 6 0.176
2024-25 Vermont D1 HockeyEast 7 0 0 0 0.000
2023-24 Vermont D1 HockeyEast 9 1 2 3 0.333
2022-23 Vermont D1 HockeyEast 22 3 2 5 0.227
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.28
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.23
2022-23 · Vermont
-19.0% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

45%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
15%
Age-Out / Club
35%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#14946
Forward overall
#757
Forward born in 2002
#572
in BCHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.72 PPG
→ Alaska Fairbanks (0.20 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.74 PPG
→ Michigan Tech (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.12 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.64 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

University of New England · 2012-13
1.654 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Adrian · 2006-07
1.655 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
St. Scholastica · 2008-09
0.852 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.