icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-24 | — | NCDC | 10 | 4 | 5 | 93.2% | 2.70 | 1 | 0.9400 | 81.7% |
| 2023-24 | — | BCHL | 21 | 6 | 13 | 91.9% | 2.70 | 0 | 0.9990 | 83.8% |
| 2022-23 | — | CCHL | 45 | 32 | 8 | 91.9% | 2.43 | 1 | 0.9700 | 87.4% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Aurora | D3 | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2024-25 | Aurora | D3 | 5 | — | — | 91.7% | 3.09 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Michael Sochan | BCHL | 90.6% | 82.1% | Robert Morris | 100.0% | — |
| Adam Manji | BCHL | 90.4% | 82.2% | American International | 92.1% | 2.70 |
| Colin Winn | BCHL | 90.2% | 82.5% | St. Lawrence | 88.3% | 4.50 |
| Nick Bevilacqua | NCDC | 94.8% | 83.4% | Bentley | 95.2% | 0.99 |
| Brendan Holahan | NAHL | 89.7% | 82.1% | Union | 85.7% | 4.48 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emil Norrman | USPHL-Premier | 91.3% | 81.2% | Buffalo State | D3 | 93.1% | 2.30 |
| Dane Couture | MJHL | 86.5% | 80.8% | Concordia | D3 | 87.3% | 2.94 |
| Cole Defazio | OJHL | 89.7% | 82.7% | Neumann | D3 | 90.7% | 3.57 |
| John Simon | NA3HL | 92.1% | 81.0% | Post | D2 | 91.6% | 3.15 |
| Kevin Lake | NA3HL | 95.1% | 82.8% | Hamline | D3 | 91.7% | 2.54 |
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.