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

Michaela Gerum Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2007-01-05 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 Central Wisconsin Storm USHS-W 23 4 5 9 0.391 0.1177 0.1177 — —
2023-24 Central Wisconsin Storm USHS-W 23 7 4 11 0.478 0.1438 0.1438 — —
2024-25 Central Wisconsin Storm USHS-W 24 9 10 19 0.792 0.2381 0.2381 — —
■ 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 Concordia Wisconsin D3 NCHA FR 25 4 3 7 0.280
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.17
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.28
2025-26 · Concordia Wisconsin
+63.3% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

20%
NCAA D1
8%
NCAA D2/D3
72%
Club / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#4684
Forward overall
#199
Forward born in 2007
#1612
in USHS-W

D1 Comparables

Danielle Marmer
19U-AAA-W · 2012-13 · 0.70 PPG
→ Quinnipiac (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Kiki Radke
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.58 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.27 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Brooke Madsen
USHS-MN-W · 2012-13 · 1.60 PPG
→ Penn State (0.60 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Lydia Passolt
USHS-MN-W · 2013-14 · 1.60 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Danielle Marmer
NE-Prep-Girls · 2012-13 · 0.39 PPG
→ Quinnipiac
0.24 No data
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Danielle Marmer
Quinnipiac ·
0.108 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Kiki Radke
Bemidji State ·
0.273 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Brooke Madsen
Penn State ·
0.600 Average
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.