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

Seth Constance Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-10-26 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 Tri-City Storm USHL 2 0 0 0 0.000 — — — —
2022-23 Tri-City Storm USHL 58 1 15 16 0.276 0.1696 0.1738 0.8129 0.8328
2023-24 Tri-City Storm USHL 61 6 16 22 0.361 0.2217 0.2161 1.0627 1.0359
■ 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 Colorado College D1 NCHC SO 36 3 6 9 0.250
2024-25 Northeastern D1 HockeyEast — 36 0 1 1 0.028
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.19
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.03
2024-25 · Northeastern
-85.2% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

70%
NCAA D1
5%
NCAA D2/D3
18%
Age-Out / Club
8%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#6642
Defenseman overall
#1638
Defenseman born in 2004
#2709
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Tommy Davis
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Princeton (0.29 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Nelson Armstrong
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.19 D1 FR PPG)
0.30 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Eric Schurhamer
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Maine (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.15 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Christian Neumann
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.29 PPG
→ UConn (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing 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

Austin Master
Stevenson · 2017-18
1.148 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Buster Larsson
Utica · 2017-18
0.679 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Matthew Headland
Canton · 2017-18
0.682 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.