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

Tanner Froese Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1993-02-17 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
2010-11 Estevan Bruins SJHL 1 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2011-12 Estevan Bruins SJHL 54 15 4 19 0.352 0.0902 0.0923 0.2653 0.2714
2012-13 Estevan Bruins SJHL 54 13 14 27 0.500 0.1281 0.1254 0.3769 0.3688
2013-14 Estevan Bruins SJHL 55 24 33 57 1.036 0.2655 0.2458 0.7812 0.7233
■ 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
2017-18 St. Norbert D3 NCHA SR 32 14 20 34 1.062
2016-17 St. Norbert D3 NCHA JR 29 13 9 22 0.759
2015-16 St. Norbert D3 NCHA SO 30 7 13 20 0.667
2014-15 St. Norbert D3 NCHA FR 26 8 8 16 0.615
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.62
2014-15 · St. Norbert
+263.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#25987
Forward overall
#892
Forward born in 1993
#407
in SJHL

D1 Comparables

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
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Average
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Walchuk
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Ian McGilvrey
Plymouth State · 2012-13
1.148 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Zikmund Mróz
Lebanon Valley · 2018-19
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Jordan Bancroft
Concordia · 2011-12
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.