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

Dan Sherer Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1992-01-12 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
2010-11 Amarillo Bulls NAHL 48 18 20 38 0.792 0.2940 0.3000 0.8383 0.8555
2011-12 Indiana Ice USHL 44 3 7 10 0.227 0.1447 0.1354 0.6811 0.6372
2012-13 Fresno Monsters NAHL 40 6 17 23 0.575 0.2135 0.1966 0.6088 0.5607
■ 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
2013-14 Milwaukee School of Engineering D3 — FR 5 2 3 5 1.000
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.15
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.00
2013-14 · Milwaukee School of Engineering
+578.9% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#18952
Forward overall
#822
Forward born in 1992
#1718
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Aidan Cavallini
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Wisconsin
0.22 No data
NCAAe PPG
Ricky DeRosa
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.71 PPG
→ Penn State (0.38 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Average
NCAAe PPG
Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.19 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Bradley Duwe
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alaska Anchorage (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Chris Cass
St. Thomas · 2010-11
0.880 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Ryan Luiten
Neumann · 2012-13
0.692 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Kevin Leonard
Western New England · 2002-03
0.588 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.