icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-19 | — | USPHL-Premier | 31 | 11 | 15 | 91.3% | 3.34 | 3 | 0.9400 | 82.1% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-23 | Buffalo State | D3 | 24 | 14 | 9 | 92.9% | 2.75 | — |
| 2021-22 | Buffalo State | D3 | 19 | 3 | 13 | 91.5% | 3.28 | — |
| 2020-21 | Buffalo State | D3 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019-20 | Buffalo State | D3 | 14 | 6 | 8 | 93.1% | 2.30 | 1 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alec Calvaruso | USHL | 89.0% | 83.1% | RPI | 86.9% | 3.91 |
| Beckham Dempsey | NCDC | 90.4% | 82.7% | Colorado College | — | — |
| Charlie Schenkel | OHL | 89.7% | 84.0% | Robert Morris | 90.9% | 2.80 |
| Quentin Sigurdson | USHL | 89.6% | 83.5% | Northeastern | 92.0% | 2.13 |
| Raythan Robbins | USHL | 88.6% | 82.2% | Bemidji State | 80.0% | 5.38 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dane Couture | MJHL | 86.5% | 83.8% | Concordia | D3 | 87.3% | 2.94 |
| Karl Zodda | NA3HL | 92.0% | 82.6% | Chatham | D3 | 86.8% | 4.66 |
| John Simon | NA3HL | 92.1% | 83.2% | Post | D2 | 91.6% | 3.15 |
| Will Pinney | NA3HL | 90.3% | 81.2% | Gustavus Adolphus | D3 | 85.8% | 4.05 |
| Dylan Boughen | USPHL-Premier | 90.6% | 83.5% | Rivier | D3 | 62.5% | 14.86 |
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.