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

Jude Ayling Elite Prospects ↗

Position: Goalie DOB: 2003-07-13 Country: England
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 — USPHL-Premier 17 12 3 93.3% 2.20 0 0.9400 84.1%
2022-23 — USPHL-Premier 13 4 6 90.6% 4.23 0 0.9400 84.7%
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 Beloit D3 2 — — 89.7% 2.65 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
Quentin Sigurdson USHL 89.6% 83.5% Northeastern 92.0% 2.13
Alec Calvaruso USHL 89.0% 83.1% RPI 86.9% 3.91
Jack Williams USHL 90.8% 84.5% Notre Dame 88.9% 2.90
Ben Bonisteel OJHL 92.6% 84.6% Canisius 89.3% 3.10
Charlie Schenkel OHL 89.7% 84.0% Robert Morris 90.9% 2.80
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
Dylan Boughen USPHL-Premier 90.6% 83.5% Rivier D3 62.5% 14.86
John Simon NA3HL 92.1% 83.2% Post D2 91.6% 3.15
Nathan Loisel CCHL 88.3% 83.8% Southern New Hampshire D2 92.5% 2.61
Dane Couture MJHL 86.5% 83.8% Concordia D3 87.3% 2.94
Kevin Lake NA3HL 95.1% 85.4% 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.