icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-25 | — | EHL | 26 | 5 | 18 | 90.1% | 3.93 | 1 | 0.9400 | 79.5% |
| 2023-24 | — | NA3HL | 16 | 8 | 4 | 92.8% | 2.69 | 1 | 0.9400 | 84.7% |
| 2022-23 | — | NA3HL | 1 | 1 | 0 | 85.2% | 4.00 | 0 | 0.9400 | 83.1% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Elmira | D3 | 10 | — | — | 88.9% | 3.91 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ryan Keyes | NCDC | 92.6% | 79.7% | Merrimack | 92.0% | 2.22 |
| Cole Plowman | MJHL | 93.4% | 80.7% | Alaska Fairbanks | 100.0% | — |
| Charles-Edward Gravel | QMJHL | 91.4% | 77.9% | Mercyhurst | 90.7% | 3.22 |
| Austin Elliott | OHL | 92.4% | 79.6% | UMass Lowell | 88.5% | 3.01 |
| Henry Levy | BCHL | 91.8% | 80.8% | Arizona State | 100.0% | — |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cameron Hrdlicka | SJHL | 89.6% | 79.6% | Concordia | D3 | 89.0% | 3.97 |
| Dean Hahn | USPHL-Premier | 91.6% | 80.0% | Salem State | D3 | 88.9% | 3.95 |
| Logan Gorbitz | USPHL-Premier | 91.8% | 79.4% | Neumann | D3 | 84.4% | 5.24 |
| Logan Palmer | USPHL-Premier | 92.1% | 80.5% | Western New England | D3 | 90.9% | 3.11 |
| Nicholas Von Kaufmann | OJHL | 88.9% | 79.9% | Marian | D3 | 88.6% | 3.25 |
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.