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

Thomas Gerum Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Forward DOB: 2004-08-16 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
2023-24 Granite City Lumberjacks NA3HL 35 16 16 32 0.914 0.2103 0.2098 — —
2024-25 — NA3HL 37 12 33 45 1.216 0.2797 0.2645 0.3853 0.3643
■ 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
2025-26 Salve Regina D3 CNE FR 25 4 7 11 0.440
Pre-College Projection vs. Actual Freshman Year
Projected PPG
0.21
before college
→
Actual FR PPG
0.44
2025-26 · Salve Regina
+111.8% vs. projection

College Pathway Likelihood (based on 40 comparables)

40%
NCAA D2/D3
2%
Club / ACHA
0%
Other

NCAAe Rankings

#21020
Forward overall
#1139
Forward born in 2004
#476
in NA3HL

D1 Comparables

Woody Hudson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.43 PPG
→ St. Lawrence (0.30 D1 FR PPG)
0.24 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jonathan Davis
NAHL · 2012-13 · 1.03 PPG
→ Nebraska Omaha (0.06 D1 FR PPG)
0.39 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Eli Lichtenwald
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.36 PPG
→ Union (0.68 D1 FR PPG)
0.20 Strong
NCAAe PPG
Davey Middleton
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.50 PPG
→ Brown (0.10 D1 FR PPG)
0.28 Developing
NCAAe PPG
Jordan Nelson
USHL · 2012-13 · 0.59 PPG
→ Minnesota (0.22 D1 FR PPG)
0.32 Developing
NCAAe PPG

D2/3 Comparables

Dennis Kubat
St. Scholastica · 2007-08
0.286 Developing
actual D2/3 PPG
Tim Crowley
SUNY Brockport · 2004-05
0.440 Average
actual D2/3 PPG
Michael Hollander
Becker · 2009-10
0.467 Average
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.