icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-23 | — | NCDC | 18 | 4 | 8 | 91.4% | 3.42 | 0 | 0.9400 | 85.5% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Amherst | D3 | 13 | — | — | 92.7% | 1.99 | 2 |
| 2024-25 | Amherst | D3 | 13 | 6 | 5 | 91.6% | 2.23 | 0 |
| 2023-24 | Amherst | D3 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 94.9% | 1.40 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Philip Svedebäck | USHL | 91.0% | 85.2% | Providence | 90.9% | 2.18 |
| Jarrett Fiske | CCHL | 90.9% | 85.1% | American International | — | — |
| Samuel Urban | USHL | 89.9% | 83.4% | Arizona State | 90.4% | 3.53 |
| Oliver Auyeung-Ashton | BCHL | 90.9% | 87.4% | Northern Michigan | 93.0% | 2.67 |
| Logan Neaton | BCHL | 91.4% | 87.3% | UMass Lowell | 86.9% | 3.85 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Russ Decoste | USPHL-Premier | 93.1% | 87.0% | Westfield State | D3 | 93.3% | 2.38 |
| Jackson Fellner | SJHL | 89.9% | 85.7% | Alvernia | D3 | 92.4% | 2.68 |
| Chad Lowe | USPHL-Premier | 93.5% | 86.9% | SUNY Morrisville | D3 | 90.2% | 4.99 |
| Carson Ironside | AJHL | 87.8% | 84.2% | Albertus Magnus | D3 | 89.3% | 2.76 |
| Ford DeLoss | USPHL-Premier | 92.0% | 85.8% | Stevenson | D3 | 50.0% | 3.85 |
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.