icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-24 | Muskegon Lumberjacks | USHL | 11 | 6 | 3 | 87.0% | 3.86 | 0 | 0.9983 | 82.8% |
| 2022-23 | — | USHL | 24 | 8 | 11 | 86.5% | 3.99 | 0 | 0.9983 | 85.5% |
| 2021-22 | — | USHL | 40 | 25 | 9 | 89.7% | 3.13 | 2 | 0.9983 | 92.1% |
| 2020-21 | — | NAHL | 40 | 14 | 22 | 89.2% | 3.37 | 1 | 0.9843 | 87.8% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Denver | D1 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 90.9% | 2.60 | 0 |
| 2024-25 | Denver | D1 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2023-24 | Denver | D1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 85.7% | 4.41 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Christian Manz | USHL | 88.0% | 83.7% | Augustana | 89.4% | 2.84 |
| Dylan Silverstein | USHL | 88.8% | 84.6% | Quinnipiac | 90.3% | 2.25 |
| Jackson Unger | WHL | 89.9% | 85.7% | Colorado College | 91.1% | 2.53 |
| Joey Lamoreaux | USHL | 89.7% | 85.6% | St. Cloud State | 89.3% | 3.25 |
| Stephen Peck | USHL | 90.9% | 86.4% | Michigan | 91.1% | 2.61 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dylan Dewatcher | OJHL | 86.3% | 85.2% | Western Connecticut | D3 | 85.8% | 5.91 |
| Brandon Shantz | NA3HL | 89.7% | 82.9% | Plymouth State | D3 | 92.1% | 3.00 |
| Owen Carlson | NA3HL | 92.1% | 84.2% | Lawrence | D3 | 90.2% | 3.41 |
| Nolan Mahaffey | NCDC | 87.4% | 86.2% | Lawrence | D3 | 90.5% | 3.39 |
| Nikolas Charles | USPHL-Premier | 89.1% | 83.2% | Roger Williams | D3 | 85.4% | 6.79 |
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.