icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-23 | — | MJHL | 22 | 14 | 6 | 90.3% | 3.25 | 1 | 0.9700 | 87.3% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Gustavus Adolphus | D3 | 22 | — | — | 91.2% | 2.36 | 1 |
| 2024-25 | Gustavus Adolphus | D3 | 17 | — | — | 88.8% | 2.76 | 0 |
| 2023-24 | Gustavus Adolphus | D3 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 87.8% | 3.08 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Freddie Halyk | AJHL | 91.0% | 87.5% | Denver | 88.3% | 2.91 |
| Kevin Reidler | USHL | 90.2% | 87.9% | Nebraska Omaha | 92.0% | 2.74 |
| Albin Boija | SHL-J20 | 92.1% | 85.8% | Maine | 91.6% | 2.01 |
| Jacob Biron | CCHL | 90.9% | 87.1% | Army | 92.3% | 1.68 |
| Calvin Vachon | USHL | 89.6% | 86.8% | Alaska Fairbanks | 89.7% | 3.11 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zach Dosan | NA3HL | 92.1% | 86.7% | Gustavus Adolphus | D3 | 72.5% | 6.60 |
| Michael Paterson-Jones | USPHL-Premier | 92.0% | 88.9% | Wilkes | D3 | 89.5% | 3.08 |
| Connor Carbo | EHL | 89.3% | 89.2% | Wentworth | D3 | 92.3% | 3.00 |
| Ryan Nolan | NAHL | 88.9% | 90.6% | St. Olaf | D3 | 93.5% | 2.31 |
| Jarret Bovarnick | EHL | 88.3% | 87.5% | Suffolk | D3 | 87.2% | 4.52 |
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.