icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Des Moines Buccaneers | USHL | 21 | 9 | 7 | 87.7% | 2.85 | 2 | 0.9980 | 76.9% |
| 2024-25 | Des Moines Buccaneers | USHL | 34 | 16 | 12 | 88.7% | 3.17 | 1 | 0.9980 | 83.8% |
| 2023-24 | — | NAHL | 32 | 13 | 9 | 91.0% | 2.26 | 2 | 0.9843 | 96.9% |
| 2022-23 | — | USHL | 2 | 0 | 0 | 85.7% | 1.98 | 0 | 0.9980 | 93.0% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Northern Michigan | D1 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 87.0% | 3.43 | 0 |
Historical goalies with similar age-adjusted SVe profiles who went on to play NCAA D1.
| Name | Junior League | Junior SV% | Adj SVe | College | NCAA SV% | NCAA GAA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alec Calvaruso | USHL | 89.0% | 77.9% | RPI | 86.9% | 3.91 |
| Quentin Sigurdson | USHL | 89.6% | 78.2% | Northeastern | 92.0% | 2.13 |
| Charlie Schenkel | OHL | 89.7% | 78.8% | Robert Morris | 90.9% | 2.80 |
| Raythan Robbins | USHL | 88.6% | 76.6% | Bemidji State | 80.0% | 5.38 |
| Aaron Randazzo | USHL | 88.8% | 77.0% | Air Force | 82.4% | 5.23 |
Historical goalies with similar age-adjusted SVe profiles who went on to play NCAA D2/D3.
| Name | Junior League | Junior SV% | Adj SVe | College | Div | SV% | GAA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Will Pinney | NA3HL | 90.3% | 78.8% | Gustavus Adolphus | D3 | 85.8% | 4.05 |
| Dylan Boughen | USPHL-Premier | 90.6% | 79.8% | Rivier | D3 | 62.5% | 14.86 |
| Dane Couture | MJHL | 86.5% | 80.8% | Concordia | D3 | 87.3% | 2.94 |
| Joshua Bordeaux | USPHL-Premier | 85.1% | 76.2% | Fitchburg State | D3 | 100.0% | — |
| Karl Zodda | NA3HL | 92.0% | 79.9% | Chatham | D3 | 86.8% | 4.66 |
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.