← New Search ↗ Social Card

Seoyoung Yoo Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-10-30 Country: South Korea
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
2021-22 OHA Mavericks Tardiff U22 OWHL-U22 8 0 1 1 0.125 0.0438 0.0438
2022-23 OHA Mavericks Tardiff U22 OWHL-U22 58 7 19 26 0.448 0.1570 0.1570
2023-24 OHA Mavericks Tardiff U22 OWHL-U22 64 14 24 38 0.594 0.2079 0.2079
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 Plattsburgh D3 SUNYAC SO 28 2 6 8 0.286
2025-26 SUNY Plattsburgh D3 SUNYAC SO 28 2 6 8 0.286
2024-25 Plattsburgh D3 SUNYAC FR 28 2 9 11 0.393
2024-25 Plattsburgh State D3 28 2 9 11 0.393
2024-25 SUNY Plattsburgh D3 28 2 9 11 0.393
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.18
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.39
2024-25 · Plattsburgh
+122.0% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

15%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
85%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#1069
Defenseman overall
#197
Defenseman born in 2004
#248
in OWHL-U22

D1 Comparables

USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.38 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.61 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.16 PPG
→ Boston College (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Average D
NCAAe PPG
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.27 PPG
→ Union
0.17 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.08 PPG
→ Harvard (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.13 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Ohio State ·
0.611 Strong D
actual D2/3 PPG
Boston College ·
0.268 Average D
actual D2/3 PPG
Union ·
0.000 No data
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.