icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-22 | — | MJHL | 38 | 30 | 7 | 92.1% | 2.21 | 6 | 0.9700 | 89.2% |
| 2020-21 | — | AJHL | 12 | 5 | 5 | 91.0% | 3.02 | 0 | 0.9700 | 88.3% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-24 | RPI | D1 | 9 | 1 | 6 | 87.7% | 4.30 | 0 |
| 2022-23 | RPI | D1 | 6 | 0 | 4 | 89.6% | 3.11 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grant Riley | BCHL | 90.7% | 89.0% | Northeastern | 82.4% | 3.06 |
| Roan Clarke | BCHL | 90.8% | 89.2% | Dartmouth | 86.0% | 3.93 |
| Luca Di Pasquo | BCHL | 92.2% | 91.1% | Michigan | 91.0% | 2.41 |
| Ashton Abel | AJHL | 90.9% | 87.0% | Boston University | 89.1% | 3.15 |
| Aiden Wright | USHL | 90.6% | 87.1% | Vermont | 89.2% | 3.10 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Michael Paterson-Jones | USPHL-Premier | 92.0% | 88.7% | Wilkes | D3 | 89.5% | 3.08 |
| Connor Carbo | EHL | 89.3% | 90.3% | Wentworth | D3 | 92.3% | 3.00 |
| Nevin Tardif | USPHL-Premier | 90.4% | 88.0% | Worcester State | D3 | 89.8% | 3.54 |
| Zach Dosan | NA3HL | 92.1% | 87.8% | Gustavus Adolphus | D3 | 72.5% | 6.60 |
| Brody Haynes | NCDC | 92.5% | 92.3% | Elmira | D3 | 94.8% | 1.22 |
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.