icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
icepath.io · Hockey Analytics
| Season | Team | League | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO | SVe Factor | Age-Adj SV% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-24 | Washington Pride 19U AAA | JWHL-U19 | 15 | 4 | 8 | 84.4% | 3.04 | 0 | 0.9700 | 81.9% |
| Season | School | Div | GP | W | L | SV% | GAA | SO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | Connecticut College | D3 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 94.2% | 1.75 | 0 |
| 2024-25 | Connecticut College | D3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 88.9% | 1.20 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mattie Robitzer | 19U-AAA-W | 94.3% | 80.6% | Northeastern | — | — |
| Madison Bowtell | CSSHL-U18W | 93.2% | 87.6% | Lindenwood | 86.5% | 4.96 |
| Bella Gould | 19U-AAA-W | 92.0% | 89.2% | Syracuse | — | — |
| Catherine Hodgins | OWHL-U22 | 92.6% | 89.8% | Lindenwood | 90.4% | 3.35 |
| Lauren Mooney | OWHL-U22 | 92.9% | 90.1% | Bemidji State | 80.6% | 4.35 |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jordana DeMarinis | OWHL-U22 | 89.4% | 87.6% | St. Michael's College | D3 | 91.5% | 3.78 |
| Sarah Dobrzynski | 19U-AAA-W | 91.6% | 89.8% | Lawrence | D3 | 90.9% | 3.62 |
| Devyn Amundson | OWHL-U22 | 91.0% | 75.8% | Post | D3 | 84.1% | 6.44 |
| Rylee Eno | OWHL-U22 | 92.9% | 91.0% | Franklin Pierce | D3 | 90.9% | 6.00 |
| Eun Bee Huh | OWHL-U22 | 95.3% | 82.6% | Connecticut College | D3 | 89.6% | 1.50 |
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.