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 0.2909 0.2969 0.8356 0.8527
2011-12 Indiana Ice USHL 44 3 7 10 0.227 0.1341 0.1255 0.6827 0.6387
2012-13 Fresno Monsters NAHL 40 6 17 23 0.575 0.2113 0.1946 0.6069 0.5590
■ 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 NCHA FR 5 2 3 5 1.000
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.14
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
1.00
2013-14 · Milwaukee School of Engineering
+599.8% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#25153
Forward overall
#931
Forward born in 1992
#2010
in NAHL

D1 Comparables

Will Suter
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.47 PPG
→ Bentley (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.25 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Yasin Cissé
QMJHL · 2012-13 · 0.52 PPG
→ Boston University
0.23 No data
NCAAe PPG
Ali Thomas
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.34 PPG
→ Notre Dame (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.18 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota State (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.27 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Bobby Lachance
Suffolk · 2024-25
0.520 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Patrick Toomey
Misericordia · 2022-23
0.375 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Landon Adams
Beloit · 2024-25
0.348 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.