IcePath icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
← New Search ↗ Social Card

Lochlan Lauer Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Goalie DOB: 2003-09-29 Country: Switzerland
No commitment set

Set Commitment

NCAA Division I

Save % Equivalency
—
Goals Against Average
—
Base SV% —
Year Adj —
Source —
Confidence —

NCAA D3 / D2

Save % Equivalency
—
Goals Against Average
—
Base SV% —
Year Adj —
Source —
Confidence —
Career Trajectory
Dashed = raw SV%  ·  ■ Solid blue = age-adj SVe%  ·  ■ Green = actual college SV%
Goalie Junior Seasons
Season Team League GP W L SV% GAA SO SVe Factor Age-Adj SV%
2023-24 — EHL 19 7 9 91.1% 3.53 2 0.9400 83.5%
SVe Factor = save% equivalency relative to NCAA D1 average  ·  COVID-flagged seasons highlighted in yellow
College Seasons (Historical)
Season School Div GP W L SV% GAA SO
2025-26 Western New England D3 7 — — 85.5% 6.64 0
2024-25 Lebanon Valley D3 2 0 0 93.3% 2.24 0
Goalie Comparables (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
Rorke Applebee BCHL 90.2% 83.3% Lake Superior State 90.7% 3.00
Ben Charette AJHL 92.5% 82.7% Harvard 90.9% 2.77
Carson Dorfman NAHL 90.1% 84.7% RPI 100.0% —
John Hawthorne BCHL 91.8% 83.9% Northern Michigan 88.2% 3.10
Matthew DellaRusso NAHL 89.6% 84.3% Northeastern 66.7% 21.30
Goalie Comparables (D2/D3)

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
Dario Cantini OJHL 89.8% 83.3% Lebanon Valley D3 86.1% 5.00
Eric Daniel USPHL-Premier 92.0% 82.8% King's D3 86.9% 6.55
Tyler Sayger NCDC 89.4% 83.4% King's D3 90.5% 4.40
Jack McGovern CCHL 90.2% 83.3% Wentworth D3 90.2% 3.16
Jeff Zero NA3HL 95.0% 83.7% Elmira D3 100.0% —

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.