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 | 31 | 14 | 12 | 89.7% | 3.39 | 2 | 0.9843 | 85.6% |
| 2024-25 | Madison Capitols | USHL | 1 | 0 | 1 | 88.6% | 4.04 | 0 | 0.9980 | 80.3% |
| 2023-24 | — | BCHL | 10 | 9 | 0 | 88.8% | 2.88 | 0 | 0.9990 | 90.1% |
| 2023-24 | Cedar Rapids RoughRiders | USHL | 18 | 5 | 10 | 88.0% | 3.26 | 0 | 0.9980 | 86.0% |
| 2022-23 | — | USHL | 23 | 7 | 10 | 87.3% | 3.29 | 1 | 0.9980 | 91.4% |
| 2021-22 | — | NTDP-U18 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 86.7% | 4.16 | 0 | 0.9200 | 81.2% |
| 2021-22 | — | USHL | 2 | 0 | 2 | 86.7% | 4.16 | 0 | 0.9980 | 97.0% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Quinnipiac | D1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 100.0% | — | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ethan David | BCHL | 90.9% | 85.5% | RIT | 90.9% | 2.68 |
| Quentin Miller | BCHL | 92.3% | 86.9% | Denver | 91.6% | 2.39 |
| Hobie Hedquist | BCHL | 91.4% | 86.4% | North Dakota | 90.5% | 2.51 |
| Tyler Krivtsov | NAHL | 90.8% | 86.3% | Alaska Anchorage | 89.2% | 3.12 |
| Callum Tung | BCHL | 91.7% | 85.8% | UConn | 93.3% | 2.01 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gustave Bylin | AJHL | 90.4% | 85.5% | Tufts | D3 | 89.8% | 3.01 |
| Nolan Mahaffey | NCDC | 87.4% | 85.4% | Lawrence | D3 | 90.5% | 3.39 |
| Maxim Zinchenko | USPHL-Premier | 91.8% | 85.4% | Johnson & Wales | D3 | 90.8% | 3.68 |
| Collin Lemanski | NA3HL | 93.6% | 85.3% | St. Norbert | D3 | 100.0% | — |
| Anthony Beaulieu | EHL | 89.2% | 87.5% | New England College | D3 | 93.0% | 2.37 |
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.