icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-22 | — | NAHL | 48 | 12 | 30 | 89.2% | 4.16 | 0 | 0.9843 | 79.5% |
| 2020-21 | — | NAHL | 31 | 12 | 12 | 92.1% | 2.48 | 2 | 0.9843 | 90.6% |
| 2019-20 | — | NCDC | 22 | 13 | 5 | 93.0% | 2.43 | 4 | 0.9400 | 87.4% |
| 2018-19 | — | NCDC | 5 | 3 | 2 | 91.7% | 3.20 | 1 | 0.9400 | 95.2% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-24 | Brown | D1 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2022-23 | Brown | D1 | 7 | 1 | 6 | 86.8% | 4.19 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Teagan Kendrick | BCHL | 91.5% | 80.5% | Sacred Heart | 92.0% | 2.42 |
| Thomas Heaney | NAHL | 90.0% | 80.4% | UConn | 86.7% | 4.39 |
| Cullen DeYoung | NAHL | 91.0% | 81.0% | Sacred Heart | 94.3% | 1.73 |
| Luke Lush | AJHL | 91.9% | 77.5% | Sacred Heart | 91.5% | 2.11 |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ben Dardis | AJHL | 90.3% | 79.6% | Buffalo State | D3 | 89.9% | 2.82 |
| Andreai Proctor-Ramirez | AJHL | 90.4% | 79.8% | Marian | D3 | 91.0% | 3.04 |
| Dawson Rodin | NOJHL | 92.8% | 79.6% | Marian | D3 | 89.3% | 3.24 |
| Josh Nadler | AJHL | 89.5% | 78.8% | Hamilton | D3 | 68.8% | 12.03 |
| Nikolas Trakakis | MJHL | 87.9% | 78.3% | Chatham | D3 | 93.4% | 2.45 |
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.