icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Windsor Spitfires | OHL | 50 | 32 | 11 | 90.8% | 2.16 | 4 | 1.0008 | 84.8% |
| 2024-25 | Windsor Spitfires | OHL | 51 | 34 | 10 | 89.2% | 2.94 | 4 | 1.0008 | 86.6% |
| 2023-24 | Windsor Spitfires | OHL | 39 | 10 | 23 | 85.5% | 5.09 | 0 | 1.0008 | 86.3% |
| 2022-23 | — | OHL | 40 | 26 | 6 | 90.1% | 3.03 | 1 | 1.0008 | 94.2% |
| 2021-22 | — | OHL | 17 | 5 | 10 | 87.9% | 4.92 | 0 | 1.0008 | 94.7% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Michael Sochan | BCHL | 90.6% | 86.1% | Robert Morris | 100.0% | — |
| Colin Winn | BCHL | 90.2% | 86.1% | St. Lawrence | 88.3% | 4.50 |
| Nick Bevilacqua | NCDC | 94.8% | 86.1% | Bentley | 95.2% | 0.99 |
| Charlie Schenkel | OHL | 89.7% | 84.0% | Robert Morris | 90.9% | 2.80 |
| Connor Murphy | CCHL | 91.7% | 84.9% | Northeastern | 68.8% | 7.04 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emil Norrman | USPHL-Premier | 91.3% | 84.6% | Buffalo State | D3 | 93.1% | 2.30 |
| Braedyn McIntosh | BCHL | 91.9% | 85.5% | Aurora | D3 | 91.7% | 3.09 |
| Kevin Lake | NA3HL | 95.1% | 85.4% | Hamline | D3 | 91.7% | 2.54 |
| Dane Couture | MJHL | 86.5% | 83.8% | Concordia | D3 | 87.3% | 2.94 |
| Kevin Lake | NAHL | 87.9% | 85.8% | Hamline | D3 | 91.7% | 2.54 |
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.