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

Kareem El-Bashir Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-03-02 Country: USA
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 Connecticut Jr. Rangers NCDC 5 1 1 2 0.400 0.1631 0.1763 — —
2022-23 Maryland Black Bears NAHL 45 7 9 16 0.356 0.1306 0.1352 0.3753 0.3886
2023-24 Maryland Black Bears NAHL 60 10 27 37 0.617 0.2266 0.2238 0.6509 0.6429
2024-25 Maryland Black Bears NAHL 56 16 12 28 0.500 0.1837 0.1718 0.5278 0.4936
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

22%
NCAA D1
10%
NCAA D2/D3
57%
Age-Out / Club
10%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#27935
Forward overall
#1626
Forward born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
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
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Vinny Post
Adrian · 2015-16
0.714 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Friedman
Trinity · 2024-25
0.583 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
John Stevenson
Castleton · 2015-16
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.