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

Trevor Shorter Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Defense DOB: 2009-10-07 Country: USA
Notre Dame
BigTen D1

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
2025-26 Chicago Steel USHL 34 5 2 7 0.206 0.1215 0.1364 0.6178 0.6937
2026-27 Chicago Steel USHL 4 0 3 3 0.750 0.4424 0.4424 2.2505 2.2505
■ Blue = NCAAe (D1 anchor)   ■ Green = D3e (D3 anchor)   COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

82%
NCAA D1
0%
NCAA D2/D3
2%
Age-Out / Club
12%
Pro / Other

NCAAe Rankings

#13552
Defenseman overall
#245
Defenseman born in 2009
#3805
in USHL

D1 Comparables

Ian McCoshen
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.83 PPG
→ Boston College (0.37 D1 FR PPG)
0.52 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Mark Friedman
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.55 PPG
→ Bowling Green (0.49 D1 FR PPG)
0.35 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Neal Pionk
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Minnesota Duluth (0.42 D1 FR PPG)
0.31 Strong D
NCAAe PPG
Michael Brodzinski
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.54 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.50 D1 FR PPG)
0.34 Elite D
NCAAe PPG
Matt Nuttle
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.67 PPG
→ Cornell
0.41 No data
NCAAe PPG

Notre Dame Alumni similar profiles who attended this school

Jordan Gross
USHL 2012-13
0.67
actual FR PPG at Notre Dame
Andrew Peeke
USHL 2015-16
0.35
actual FR PPG at Notre Dame
Spencer Stastney
USHL 2017-18
0.10
actual FR PPG at Notre Dame
Jake Boltmann
USHL 2019-20
0.00
actual FR PPG at Notre Dame

D2/3 Comparables

Ryan Reifler
Elmira · 2016-17
1.067 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Luke Aquaro
Hobart · 2016-17
1.231 Elite
actual D2/3 PPG
Sam Anderson
Albertus Magnus · 2017-18
0.720 Strong
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.