← New Search ↗ Social Card

Shane Gersich Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1996-07-10 Country: USA
Signed Professionally
Iserlohn Roosters · DEL

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
2012-13 Omaha Lancers USHL 6 1 0 1 0.167 0.1062 0.1176 0.4995 0.5529
2013-14 U.S. National U18 Team NTDP-U18 61 16 16 32 0.525 0.4173 0.4089 1.9647 1.9253
2014-15 Omaha Lancers USHL 52 27 23 50 0.962 0.6123 0.6190 2.8813 2.9130
2023-24 Västerås IK Allsvenskan 48 19 13 32 0.667
2024-25 Iserlohn Roosters DEL 51 16 21 37 0.726
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
2017-18 North Dakota D1 NCHC JR 40 13 16 29 0.725
2016-17 North Dakota D1 NCHC SO 40 21 16 37 0.925
2015-16 North Dakota D1 NCHC FR 37 9 2 11 0.297
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.50
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.30
2015-16 · North Dakota
-40.3% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#2782
Forward overall
#102
Forward born in 1996

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 1.07 PPG
→ Michigan (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.69 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Western Michigan (0.18 D1 FR PPG)
0.58 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.81 PPG
→ North Dakota (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.91 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.54 D1 FR PPG)
0.58 Average
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 1.20 PPG
→ Ohio State (0.70 D1 FR PPG)
0.77 Strong
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

New England · 2017-18
1.667 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
SUNY Oswego · 2004-05
1.704 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Hamilton · 2001-02
1.400 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.