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

Keith Seabrook Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1988-08-02 Country: Canada
2006 · Round 2, Pick #52  ·  Washington Capitals Washington Capitals
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
2004-05 Coquitlam Express BCHL 58 8 20 28 0.483 0.1860 0.2116 0.7022 0.7988
2005-06 Coquitlam Express BCHL 57 10 24 34 0.597 0.2298 0.2499 0.8675 0.9433
2007-08 Calgary Hitmen WHL 59 4 13 17 0.288 0.1402 0.1345 0.7037 0.6752
2008-09 Calgary Hitmen WHL 64 15 40 55 0.859 0.4181 0.3805 2.0993 1.9103
■ 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
2006-07 Denver D1 NCHC FR 37 2 11 13 0.351
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.22
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.35
2006-07 · Denver
+58.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#3625
Defenseman overall
#649
Defenseman born in 1988

D1 Comparables

Paul LaDue
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.79 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.51 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Benjamin Gallacher
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.45 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Van Voorhis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Denver (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Barrett Kaib
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Providence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Taylor Fleming
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Austin Master
Stevenson · 2018-19
1.148 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Mathew Thompson
Adrian · 2013-14
1.536 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Niko Schoner
Canton · 2022-23
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.