icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Flint Firebirds | OHL | 51 | 36 | 9 | 90.7% | 2.70 | 4 | 1.0008 | 83.9% |
| 2024-25 | Kingston Frontenacs | OHL | 25 | 11 | 4 | 88.6% | 3.13 | 0 | 1.0008 | 85.3% |
| 2023-24 | Kingston Frontenacs | OHL | 59 | 27 | 27 | 88.0% | 3.55 | 0 | 1.0008 | 88.1% |
| 2022-23 | — | OHL | 29 | 11 | 14 | 89.9% | 3.53 | 1 | 1.0008 | 93.1% |
| 2021-22 | — | OJHL | 16 | 9 | 7 | 87.8% | 3.85 | 1 | 0.9700 | 92.6% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ryan Keyes | NCDC | 92.6% | 83.2% | Merrimack | 92.0% | 2.22 |
| Alexander Tracy | USHL | 89.6% | 83.0% | Minnesota | 87.9% | 2.24 |
| Joshua Seeley | NAHL | 90.0% | 84.9% | Bentley | 82.6% | 8.58 |
| Jan Spunar | USHL | 90.7% | 84.1% | North Dakota | 91.9% | 1.91 |
| Chad Veltri | USHL | 90.2% | 83.9% | Niagara | 93.1% | 2.10 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dean Hahn | USPHL-Premier | 91.6% | 84.1% | Salem State | D3 | 88.9% | 3.95 |
| Logan Palmer | USPHL-Premier | 92.1% | 84.5% | Western New England | D3 | 90.9% | 3.11 |
| Josh Koziol | NA3HL | 93.3% | 83.8% | Augsburg | D3 | 71.4% | 5.76 |
| Nicholas Von Kaufmann | OJHL | 88.9% | 85.5% | Marian | D3 | 88.6% | 3.25 |
| Jeffrey Reda | USPHL-Premier | 90.6% | 83.7% | Franklin Pierce | D2 | 85.9% | 5.85 |
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.