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

Blake Pietila Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Goalie DOB: 2000-01-27 Country: USA
Signed Professionally
Allsvenskan

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%
2024-25 — Allsvenskan 27 14 10 89.8% 2.77 0 1.0100 94.8%
2018-19 — USHL 47 30 13 91.2% 2.30 5 0.9980 89.7%
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
2023-24 Michigan Tech D1 37 18 13 91.7% 2.38 4
2022-23 Michigan Tech D1 37 23 11 92.4% 2.15 10
2021-22 Michigan Tech D1 37 21 13 91.8% 1.91 —
2020-21 Michigan Tech D1 24 14 9 93.4% 1.81 3
2019-20 Michigan Tech D1 6 0 3 86.8% 3.24 0
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 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
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
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.