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

Seth Barton Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1999-08-18 Country: Canada
2018 · Round 3, Pick #81  ·  Detroit Red Wings Detroit Red Wings
Signed Professionally
Malmö Redhawks · SHL

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
2016-17 Nanaimo Clippers BCHL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2017-18 Trail Smoke Eaters BCHL 49 6 27 33 0.673 0.2595 0.2701 0.9801 1.0200
2023-24 KooKoo Liiga 19 3 8 11 0.579 1.4472 1.5952 4.9763 5.4853
2024-25 KooKoo Liiga 55 6 13 19 0.345 0.8637 0.9218 2.9700 3.1699
2025-26 Malmö Redhawks SHL 47 4 12 16 0.340 0.8510 0.8510 4.4417 4.4417
■ 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 UMass Lowell D1 HockeyEast JR 20 2 9 11 0.550
2019-20 UMass Lowell D1 HockeyEast SO 30 3 12 15 0.500
2018-19 UMass Lowell D1 HockeyEast FR 33 2 8 10 0.303
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.26
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.30
2018-19 · UMass Lowell
+18.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

⭐ Elite profile — high probability of D1 placement; comparable to top-end prospects
12%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
88%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

D2/3 Comparables

Arkhip Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Neil Trimm
Neumann · 2003-04
1.800 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Filimon Ledenkov
St. Scholastica · 2018-19
1.636 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.