icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-24 | — | Liiga | — | — | — | — | — | — | 1.0100 | — |
| 2022-23 | — | Liiga | 18 | 0 | 11 | 87.2% | 3.87 | 0 | 1.0100 | 97.0% |
| 2018-19 | — | SM-Liiga-Jr | 30 | — | — | 90.3% | — | — | 0.9600 | 89.8% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-21 | Merrimack | D1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 90.5% | 2.97 | 0 |
| 2019-20 | Merrimack | D1 | 21 | 5 | 12 | 86.4% | 3.47 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Max Beckford | NAHL | 94.0% | 83.9% | Bentley | 90.2% | 1.84 |
| Isak Posch | NAHL | 92.6% | 82.4% | St. Cloud State | 90.1% | 2.93 |
| Jakub Krbecek | NAHL | 92.1% | 82.2% | RIT | 89.3% | 3.90 |
| Mitchell Day | NAHL | 91.6% | 81.3% | Niagara | 88.3% | 4.06 |
| Jack LaFontaine | BCHL | 92.3% | 80.1% | Minnesota | 91.9% | 2.55 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brody Haynes | NCDC | 92.5% | 92.3% | Elmira | D3 | 94.8% | 1.22 |
| Artur Dzhilavyan | EHL | 92.3% | 84.2% | Keene State | D3 | 95.9% | 1.48 |
| Ben Skelton | EHL | 91.3% | 83.4% | Keene State | D3 | 92.0% | 2.80 |
| Wills Seagrave | EHL | 94.1% | 87.0% | Wentworth | D3 | 100.0% | — |
| Joey Lovullo | NAHL | 91.2% | 83.3% | Hamilton | D3 | — | — |
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.