icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-23 | — | NAHL | 46 | 24 | 16 | 91.9% | 2.58 | 3 | 0.9843 | 90.2% |
| 2021-22 | — | OJHL | 21 | 12 | 7 | 92.5% | 2.87 | 0 | 0.9700 | 92.5% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Bowling Green | D1 | 14 | 5 | 5 | 91.3% | 2.37 | 1 |
| 2024-25 | Bowling Green | D1 | 20 | 6 | 11 | 90.6% | 2.80 | 1 |
| 2023-24 | Bowling Green | D1 | 24 | 10 | 13 | 91.8% | 2.87 | 1 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deivs Rolovs | NAHL | 91.9% | 90.1% | Niagara | 88.3% | 3.49 |
| Matt Radomsky | MJHL | 92.9% | 87.8% | Holy Cross | 90.3% | 2.90 |
| Aksel Reid | NAHL | 91.1% | 90.5% | Union | 80.0% | 2.77 |
| Connor McDonough | NAHL | 90.9% | 90.6% | Ferris State | 25.0% | 26.21 |
| Aidan Porter | BCHL | 90.8% | 87.4% | Princeton | 86.2% | 3.99 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thomas Walker | EHL | 92.5% | 91.7% | Albertus Magnus | D3 | 85.7% | 5.54 |
| Cameron Kuntar | NCDC | 89.3% | 89.1% | Chatham | D3 | 92.4% | 2.62 |
| Brody Haynes | NCDC | 92.5% | 92.3% | Elmira | D3 | 94.8% | 1.22 |
| Andrew Palena | NCDC | 91.4% | 90.7% | Amherst | D3 | 94.9% | 1.40 |
| Jarret Bovarnick | EHL | 88.3% | 87.8% | Suffolk | D3 | 87.2% | 4.52 |
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.