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 | 41 | 28 | 7 | 92.2% | 1.92 | 6 | 0.9843 | 83.0% |
| 2021-22 | — | NAHL | 19 | 7 | 9 | 90.9% | 2.68 | 2 | 0.9843 | 88.0% |
| 2020-21 | — | CCHL | — | — | — | — | — | — | 0.9700 | — |
| 2019-20 | — | NCDC | 14 | 7 | 2 | 91.6% | 2.73 | 1 | 0.9400 | 86.1% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-25 | Mercyhurst | D1 | 11 | 2 | 9 | 87.7% | 4.41 | 0 |
| 2023-24 | Mercyhurst | D1 | 8 | 1 | 5 | 90.1% | 3.92 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matt Vernon | NAHL | 93.4% | 83.7% | Colorado College | 90.1% | 3.43 |
| Charles-Edward Gravel | BCHL | 93.0% | 82.6% | Mercyhurst | 90.7% | 3.22 |
| Ryan Keane | NAHL | 92.7% | 82.8% | UConn | 100.0% | — |
| Carter Clafton | NAHL | 91.9% | 82.5% | Air Force | 100.0% | — |
| Salvatore Evola | NAHL | 91.7% | 82.9% | Bowling Green | 86.2% | 4.25 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hunter Garvey | NAHL | 89.7% | 83.2% | St. Norbert | D3 | 92.2% | 1.90 |
| Avery Rovira | EHL | 90.1% | 83.4% | Elmira | D3 | 88.9% | 3.91 |
| Blake Carlson | USPHL-Premier | 94.7% | 82.0% | Framingham State | D3 | 91.9% | 3.26 |
| Noel Olsonawski | MJHL | 91.2% | 82.3% | Concordia | D3 | 92.8% | 2.05 |
| Jackson Bernard | EHL | 90.4% | 84.2% | Adrian | D3 | 95.7% | 0.63 |
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.