icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-24 | — | NAHL | 43 | 16 | 19 | 91.8% | 3.16 | 2 | 0.9843 | 86.1% |
| 2022-23 | — | NCDC | 27 | 21 | 4 | 95.3% | 1.70 | 9 | 0.9400 | 88.8% |
| 2022-23 | — | USHL | 1 | 1 | 0 | 87.5% | 3.00 | 0 | 0.9983 | 83.5% |
| 2021-22 | — | NCDC | 17 | 11 | 4 | 91.9% | 2.91 | 1 | 0.9400 | 88.3% |
| 2021-22 | — | NAHL | 1 | 0 | 1 | 77.8% | 4.00 | 0 | 0.9843 | 78.5% |
| 2020-21 | — | NAHL | — | — | — | — | — | — | 0.9843 | — |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Army | D1 | 32 | 11 | 16 | 92.1% | 2.48 | 4 |
| 2024-25 | Army | D1 | 31 | 14 | 14 | 92.2% | 2.41 | 2 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ethan Robertson | NAHL | 91.5% | 85.7% | Canisius | 90.4% | 3.25 |
| Andrew Takacs | NAHL | 91.8% | 86.0% | Colgate | 81.8% | 4.32 |
| Kayden Hargraves | NAHL | 91.5% | 85.7% | Augustana | 92.0% | 2.72 |
| Jakub Krbecek | NAHL | 92.1% | 86.2% | RIT | 89.3% | 3.90 |
| Teagan Kendrick | BCHL | 91.5% | 85.7% | Sacred Heart | 92.0% | 2.42 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kael DePape | NAHL | 89.1% | 85.9% | Williams | D3 | 88.2% | 3.14 |
| Chase Hale | NCDC | 91.4% | 86.5% | Albertus Magnus | D3 | 92.2% | 2.54 |
| Filip Grancarov | EHL | 92.3% | 87.0% | Gustavus Adolphus | D3 | 88.1% | 2.99 |
| Ford DeLoss | NCDC | 90.0% | 85.7% | Stevenson | D3 | 88.9% | 3.00 |
| Matthew Dore | USPHL-Premier | 94.4% | 85.8% | Rivier | D3 | 88.8% | 4.78 |
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.