icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-23 | — | BCHL | 36 | 23 | 9 | 92.5% | 2.44 | 2 | 0.9990 | 88.7% |
| 2021-22 | — | BCHL | 39 | 20 | 12 | 91.1% | 2.68 | 4 | 0.9990 | 93.6% |
| 2020-21 | — | BCHL | 13 | 1 | 11 | 87.9% | 4.04 | 0 | 0.9990 | 87.8% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Minnesota | D1 | 13 | 3 | 7 | 88.8% | 3.39 | 0 |
| 2024-25 | Minnesota | D1 | 19 | 12 | 3 | 90.0% | 2.47 | 1 |
| 2023-24 | Minnesota | D1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 86.5% | 3.23 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oliver Auyeung-Ashton | BCHL | 90.9% | 87.4% | Northern Michigan | 93.0% | 2.67 |
| William Håkansson | NAHL | 91.2% | 88.3% | Lake Superior State | 83.3% | 4.83 |
| Deivs Rolovs | NAHL | 91.9% | 90.1% | Niagara | 88.3% | 3.49 |
| Logan Neaton | BCHL | 91.4% | 87.3% | UMass Lowell | 86.9% | 3.85 |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Russ Decoste | USPHL-Premier | 93.1% | 87.0% | Westfield State | D3 | 93.3% | 2.38 |
| Cameron Kuntar | NCDC | 89.3% | 89.1% | Chatham | D3 | 92.4% | 2.62 |
| Andrew Palena | NCDC | 91.4% | 90.7% | Amherst | D3 | 94.9% | 1.40 |
| Chad Lowe | USPHL-Premier | 93.5% | 86.9% | SUNY Morrisville | D3 | 90.2% | 4.99 |
| Andrew Doran | NA3HL | 93.4% | 87.1% | Utica | D3 | 100.0% | — |
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.