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

Shareef Labreche Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 1986-02-18 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
2004-05 Markham Waxers OJHL 48 9 9 18 0.375 0.0919 0.0900 0.2567 0.2515
2005-06 Markham Waxers OJHL 46 12 8 20 0.435 0.1066 0.1005 0.2976 0.2806
■ 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
2009-10 Buffalo State D3 — SR 25 4 6 10 0.400
2008-09 Buffalo State D3 — JR 21 2 6 8 0.381
2007-08 Buffalo State D3 — SO 25 1 4 5 0.200
2006-07 Buffalo State D3 — FR 21 6 4 10 0.476
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.09
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.48
2006-07 · Buffalo State
+423.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#13652
Defenseman overall
#1316
Defenseman born in 1986
#2790
in OJHL

D1 Comparables

Brandon Parker
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.20 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.12 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Joseph Fiala
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.22 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Max Everson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.31 PPG
→ Harvard (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Johnny Hrabovsky
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Air Force (0.26 D1 FR PPG)
0.14 Average D
NCAAe PPG
Aleksi Rossi
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.15 PPG
→ Brown
0.09 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Chris Lutz
Chatham · 2016-17
0.400 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Kelly Reynolds
St. Scholastica · 2003-04
0.556 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Nick Magill-Diaz
Trine · 2016-17
0.300 Developing
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.