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

Keaton Verhoeff Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2008-06-19 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
2023-24 Victoria Royals WHL 12 0 2 2 0.167 0.0810 0.0936 0.4069 0.4700
2024-25 Victoria Royals WHL 63 21 24 45 0.714 0.3473 0.3826 1.7435 1.9205
■ 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 North Dakota D1 NCHC — 36 6 14 20 0.556
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.25
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.56
2025-26 · North Dakota
+120.5% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

10%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
42%
Age-Out / Club
42%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#2753
Defenseman overall
#229
Defenseman born in 2008
#1240
in WHL

D1 Comparables

Jack Glover
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.29 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Keegan Ford
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Wisconsin (0.17 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Mark Friedman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.38 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Keaton Thompson
NTDP-U18 · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.31 D1 FR PPG)
0.26 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Corey Schueneman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.46 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Brycon Johnson
Bryn Athyn · 2014-15
0.778 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Zach Tarantino
UMass Dartmouth · 2017-18
0.667 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Donny Flynn
Wilkes · 2015-16
1.423 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.