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

Shane Geib Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 1987-09-03 Country: Canada
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
2007-08 Drayton Valley Thunder AJHL 46 3 11 14 0.304 0.1016 0.0951 0.2825 0.2645
■ 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
2011-12 Curry D3 CNE SR 0 0 0 0 0.000
2010-11 Curry D3 CNE JR 18 4 5 9 0.500
2009-10 Curry D3 — SO 16 1 3 4 0.250
2008-09 Curry D3 — FR 20 6 2 8 0.400
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.08
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.40
2008-09 · Curry
+391.4% vs. projection

NCAAe Rankings

#37735
Forward overall
#1378
Forward born in 1987
#2195
in AJHL

D1 Comparables

Jayson Angus
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.66 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.14 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Ian Miller
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.57 PPG
→ Lake Superior State (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Cody Marooney
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.65 PPG
→ Alabama-Huntsville (0.11 D1 FR PPG)
0.23 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.21 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Bob Kinne
NAHL · 2012-13 · 0.48 PPG
→ Bemidji State (0.12 D1 FR PPG)
0.17 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Livio Azevedo
SUNY Brockport · 2023-24
0.227 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Jake Lindstrom
UMass Boston · 2024-25
0.316 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Tanner Skaja
Wisconsin-Superior · 2015-16
0.240 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.