icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-25 | Muskegon Lumberjacks | USHL | 34 | 19 | 10 | 90.9% | 2.68 | 3 | 0.9980 | 81.0% |
| 2023-24 | Muskegon Lumberjacks | USHL | 30 | 18 | 10 | 90.1% | 3.18 | 1 | 0.9980 | 86.8% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Miami | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Josh Fleming | QMJHL | 90.8% | 81.4% | Penn State | 92.4% | 2.61 |
| Liam Beerman | USHL | 91.2% | 80.8% | Lindenwood | 90.3% | 3.24 |
| Vinnie Purpura | USHL | 87.9% | 78.8% | Boston University | 86.0% | 4.90 |
| Kyle Chauvette | USHL | 89.2% | 79.5% | Union | 90.5% | 2.87 |
| Kristoffer Eberly | USHL | 89.3% | 80.5% | Ohio State | 91.1% | 2.98 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jeb Lindy | USPHL-Premier | 89.3% | 81.3% | Arcadia | D3 | 89.6% | 4.06 |
| Nikolas Charles | USPHL-Premier | 89.1% | 80.4% | Roger Williams | D3 | 85.4% | 6.79 |
| Jack McGovern | CCHL | 90.2% | 83.3% | Wentworth | D3 | 90.2% | 3.16 |
| Sean Guerin | NOJHL | 90.2% | 81.9% | Southern New Hampshire | D2 | 90.7% | 3.28 |
| Jake Horoho | USPHL-Premier | 92.0% | 83.3% | Middlebury | D3 | 89.4% | 3.02 |
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.