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

Mitch Gibson Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Goalie DOB: 1999-06-25 Country: USA
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

Save % Equivalency
—
Goals Against Average
—
Base SV% —
Year Adj —
Source —
Confidence —

NCAA D3 / D2

Save % Equivalency
—
Goals Against Average
—
Base SV% —
Year Adj —
Source —
Confidence —
Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw SV%  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adj SVe%  ·  ■ Green = actual college SV%
Goalie Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP W L SV% GAA SO SVe Factor Age-Adj SV%
2018-19 — USHL 43 13 21 89.0% 3.50 2 0.9983 86.2%
SVe Factor = save% equivalency relative to NCAA D1 average  ·  COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div GP W L SV% GAA SO
2022-23 Harvard D1 27 18 7 91.9% 2.25 3
2021-22 Harvard D1 29 18 10 91.8% 2.17 0
2020-21 Harvard D1 — — — — — —
2019-20 Harvard D1 23 11 8 91.6% 2.61 1
Goalie Comparables (D1)

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
Max Väyrynen SM-Liiga-Jr 91.2% 86.5% Michigan Tech 90.3% 2.32
Jack Stark USHL 90.0% 87.0% Yale 91.9% 2.22
Nathan Krawchuk OHL 90.1% 87.3% RPI 90.9% 2.82
Cameron Whitehead USHL 90.4% 87.3% Northeastern 91.7% 2.62
Cameron Korpi USHL 89.2% 86.0% Michigan 90.4% 3.08
Goalie Comparables (D2/D3)

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
Tyler Fromolz NA3HL 92.0% 86.3% Marian D3 88.3% 3.85
Jarret Bovarnick EHL 88.3% 87.5% Suffolk D3 87.2% 4.52
Andrew Doran NA3HL 93.4% 87.0% Utica D3 100.0% —
Cameron Kuntar NCDC 89.3% 89.1% Chatham D3 92.4% 2.62
Zach Dosan NA3HL 92.1% 86.7% Gustavus Adolphus D3 72.5% 6.60

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.