icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-25 | — | NAHL | 22 | 14 | 5 | 93.5% | 1.60 | 3 | 0.9843 | 84.7% |
| 2023-24 | Waterloo Black Hawks | USHL | 29 | 13 | 12 | 88.0% | 3.30 | 1 | 0.9980 | 81.7% |
| 2022-23 | — | USHL | 34 | 21 | 11 | 88.7% | 2.99 | 0 | 0.9980 | 88.5% |
| 2021-22 | — | NAHL | 2 | 2 | 0 | 90.2% | 2.50 | 0 | 0.9843 | 97.0% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Sacred Heart | D1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 100.0% | — | 0 |
| 2024-25 | Sacred Heart | D1 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lukas Swedin | NAHL | 94.0% | 84.9% | Bentley | 91.7% | 2.13 |
| Ajeetpal Gundarah | BCHL | 93.1% | 83.6% | Sacred Heart | 93.6% | 1.90 |
| Salvatore Evola | NAHL | 91.7% | 82.9% | Bowling Green | 86.2% | 4.25 |
| David Fessenden | NAHL | 91.5% | 82.6% | Alabama-Huntsville | 86.9% | 4.44 |
| William Gramme | NAHL | 91.9% | 83.7% | Wisconsin | 95.9% | 1.13 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matt Schoephoerster | NAHL | 91.1% | 84.9% | Endicott | D3 | 90.6% | 2.11 |
| Owen Currier | EHL | 91.3% | 84.9% | Worcester State | D3 | — | — |
| Lucas Szyszka | NAHL | 91.0% | 84.7% | Lake Forest | D3 | 88.0% | 4.26 |
| Cameron Carroll | NCDC | 91.9% | 84.9% | Saint Anselm | D2 | 91.2% | 3.22 |
| Colten Lancaster | NCDC | 92.7% | 83.9% | Western New England | D3 | 85.2% | 5.41 |
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.