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

Will Gerrior Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-03-02 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
2021-22 Ottawa 67's OHL 65 8 12 20 0.308 0.1786 0.1845 0.7885 0.8146
2022-23 Ottawa 67's OHL 68 14 21 35 0.515 0.2987 0.2956 1.3189 1.3054
2023-24 Ottawa 67's OHL 67 26 19 45 0.672 0.3897 0.3671 1.7210 1.6210
2024-25 Ottawa 67's OHL 63 30 15 45 0.714 0.4145 0.3690 1.8304 1.6296
■ 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 Maine D1 HockeyEast FR 35 5 4 9 0.257
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.32
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.26
2025-26 · Maine
-18.4% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

35%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
60%
Age-Out / Club
5%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#9813
Forward overall
#402
Forward born in 2004
#695
in OHL

D1 Comparables

David Goodwin
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Penn State (0.53 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
Carlos Amestoy
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.39 No data
NCAAe PPG
Dylan Walchuk
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.86 PPG
→ Northern Michigan (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.37 Average
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Todd Skirving
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ RIT (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Scott Hudson
Manhattanville · 2008-09
1.231 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Andrew Rozak
SUNY Oswego · 2000-01
1.100 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Tyler Resch
Manhattanville · 2001-02
1.154 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.