← New Search ↗ Social Card

Shane Sooth Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-04-18 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
2008-09 NTDP-U18 26 4 5 9 0.346 0.2573 0.2633 1.2918 1.3217
2009-10 Sioux City Musketeers USHL 10 3 2 5 0.500 0.2949 0.3085 1.5017 1.5707
2010-11 Dubuque Fighting Saints USHL 60 10 33 43 0.717 0.4228 0.4209 2.1525 2.1428
2011-12 Dubuque Fighting Saints USHL 59 9 35 44 0.746 0.4399 0.4174 2.2399 2.1252
2012-13 Dubuque Fighting Saints USHL 60 13 44 57 0.950 0.5604 0.5019 2.8532 2.5553
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
2016-17 Northern Michigan D1 WCHA SR 19 5 5 10 0.526
2015-16 Northern Michigan D1 WCHA JR 35 6 7 13 0.371
2014-15 Northern Michigan D1 WCHA SO 38 6 15 21 0.553
2013-14 Northern Michigan D1 WCHA FR 38 4 13 17 0.447
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.40
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.45
2013-14 · Northern Michigan
+11.7% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#5511
Forward overall
#275
Forward born in 1992

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.94 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.50 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.80 PPG
→ RIT (0.65 D1 FR PPG)
0.43 Strong
NCAAe PPG
OHL · 2012-13 · 0.75 PPG
→ Maine
0.39 No data
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.15 D1 FR PPG)
0.49 Developing
NCAAe PPG
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.06 PPG
→ Niagara (0.58 D1 FR PPG)
0.36 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Aurora · 2013-14
1.000 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Salem State · 2021-22
1.111 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Fitchburg State · 2016-17
1.429 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.