← New Search ↗ Social Card

Chase Gresock Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1998-08-13 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
2015-16 Youngstown Phantoms USHL 4 0 1 1 0.250 0.1475 0.1577 0.7509 0.8028
2016-17 Youngstown Phantoms USHL 52 12 4 16 0.308 0.1815 0.1848 0.9241 0.9408
2017-18 Youngstown Phantoms USHL 59 26 20 46 0.780 0.4599 0.4454 2.3418 2.2679
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
2022-23 Bowling Green D1 CCHA 36 11 20 31 0.861
2021-22 Miami D1 NCHC 21 9 10 19 0.905
2020-21 Merrimack D1 HockeyEast JR 16 4 4 8 0.500
2019-20 Merrimack D1 HockeyEast SO 28 11 11 22 0.786
2018-19 Merrimack D1 HockeyEast FR 34 11 13 24 0.706
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.29
before college
Actual FR PPG
0.71
2018-19 · Merrimack
+141.7% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

90%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
10%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#11499
Forward overall
#517
Forward born in 1998
#1039
in USHL

D1 Comparables

USHL · 2012-13 · 0.78 PPG
→ RPI (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Developing
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.77 PPG
→ Colorado College (0.57 D1 FR PPG)
0.44 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.70 PPG
→ Vermont (0.21 D1 FR PPG)
0.40 Developing
NCAAe PPG
WHL · 2012-13 · 0.88 PPG
→ Wisconsin-Stout (0.59 D1 FR PPG)
0.41 Strong
NCAAe PPG
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.94 PPG
→ Yale (0.41 D1 FR PPG)
0.53 Average
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Southern New Hampshire · 2014-15
0.833 Strong
actual D2/3 PPG
Wilkes · 2016-17
1.385 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Wilkes · 2016-17
1.423 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.