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

Michael Kesselring Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2000-01-13 Country: USA
2018 NHL Draft Round 6, Pick #164  ·  Edmonton Oilers Edmonton Oilers
Signed Professionally

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
2017-18 — USHL 12 0 2 2 0.167 0.1025 0.1065 0.4911 0.5104
2018-19 — USHL 66 9 25 34 0.515 0.3167 0.3128 1.5179 1.4994
■ 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
2020-21 Northeastern D1 HockeyEast SO 20 5 3 8 0.400
2019-20 Northeastern D1 HockeyEast FR 34 2 3 5 0.147
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.22
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.15
2019-20 · Northeastern
-32.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

80%
NCAA D1
2%
NCAA D2/D3
8%
Age-Out / Club
10%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

D1 Comparables

Matias Cleland
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.62 PPG
→ New Hampshire (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Nelson Armstrong
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Nolan Gluchowski
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.40 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.55 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Ryan Lowney
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Ferris State (0.35 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Dakota Mermis
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.41 PPG
→ Denver (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Average D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Mike Bickley
Wisconsin-Superior · 2000-01
1.231 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Nolan Redler
UMass Boston · 2014-15
1.125 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Matthew Dougherty
Western New England · 2018-19
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.