← New Search ↗ Social Card

Aidan Porter Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Goalie DOB: 1999-05-18 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 BCHL 40 19 17 90.8% 2.59 4 0.9990 89.0%
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 Princeton D1 13 2 10 84.3% 4.16 0
2021-22 Princeton D1 17 2 11 87.7% 3.71
2020-21 Princeton D1
2019-20 Princeton D1 5 0 3 86.2% 3.99 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
Philip Svedebäck USHL 91.0% 87.9% Providence 90.9% 2.18
Deivs Rolovs NAHL 91.9% 90.2% Niagara 88.3% 3.49
Matt Radomsky MJHL 92.9% 88.9% Holy Cross 90.3% 2.90
Matej Marinov USHL 91.7% 88.6% Quinnipiac 91.3% 1.85
Oliver Auyeung-Ashton BCHL 90.9% 89.0% Northern Michigan 93.0% 2.67
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
Cameron Kuntar NCDC 89.3% 89.1% Chatham D3 92.4% 2.62
Russ Decoste USPHL-Premier 93.1% 88.5% Westfield State D3 93.3% 2.38
Andrew Doran NA3HL 93.4% 87.0% Utica D3 100.0%
Chad Lowe USPHL-Premier 93.5% 88.6% SUNY Morrisville D3 90.2% 4.99
Chad Lowe USPHL-Premier 93.5% 88.6% Morrisville D3 90.2% 4.99

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.