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

Ethan Seibert Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2004-03-16 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
2022-23 Lindsay Muskies OJHL 20 0 1 1 0.050 0.0150 0.0152 0.0342 0.0345
2023-24 Brockville Braves CCHL 45 2 8 10 0.222 0.0709 0.0684 0.1720 0.1660
2024-25 — NCDC 54 5 12 17 0.315 0.1755 0.1650 0.2545 0.2392
■ 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 SUNY Brockport D3 — FR 13 0 2 2 0.154
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.12
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.15
2025-26 · SUNY Brockport
+28.9% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

25%
NCAA D2/D3
5%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#16153
Defenseman overall
#3053
Defenseman born in 2004

D1 Comparables

Marc-Antoine Carrier
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.37 PPG
→ Brown (0.04 D1 FR PPG)
0.16 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Michael Holland
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.18 PPG
→ RIT (0.05 D1 FR PPG)
0.10 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Carter Foguth
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.08 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.05 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Dominic Racobaldo
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.33 PPG
→ American International (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing D
NCAAe PPG
Brandon Carlson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.24 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.13 Developing D
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Braden Lindstrom
St. Norbert · 2021-22
0.357 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Josh Haverstrom
UMass Boston · 2013-14
0.500 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Eric McLintock
Wisconsin-River Falls · 2009-10
0.312 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.