ECAC Preview 2024-25
Is this the year Quinnipiac gets de-throned? What teams are on the rise? What I think and what the model thinks
The new season is here now! Men’s college hockey gets going very soon with the first weekend of real games starting on October 4th. With that, it’s time for the yearly deep dive into the ECAC. We’ll be looking at the model once again and what it outputs, but I actually disagree with some of the model outputs this year, not significantly but enough to make note of it. I’ll be explaining where my agreements and disagreements are and giving my own ranking as part of the deep dives. Let’s get going!
1. Quinnipiac (Last Year: 1)
My Ranking: 2
Quinnipiac has been projected by the model to finish first 3 (now 4) seasons in a row. They’ve delivered the past 3 years and left no doubts about the top program in the ECAC. The model sees them as really good once again, and while I don’t disagree with that, if there’s a year where they won’t finish first, it’s this one due to their youth (and due to the team the model has as #2).
Key Losses: F Collin Graf (49 points in 34 games), F Jacob Quillan (46 points in 39 games), F Sam Lipkin (35 points in 39 games), F Cristophe Tellier (26 points in 39 games), D Jayden Lee (26 points in 39 games), D Charles-Alexis Legault (24 points in 39 games), F Zach Tupker (21 points in 39 games), D Iivari Rasanen (11 points in 39 games), G Vinny Duplessis (0.914 SV%)
Key Returners: F Mason Marcellus (36 points in 39 games), F Andon Cerbone (26 points in 39 games), D Davis Pennington (24 points in 39 games), F Travis Treloar (24 points in 30 games), D Cooper Moore (22 points in 39 games), G Matej Marinov (0.913 SV%)
Key Newcomers: D Aaron Bohlinger (UMass), F Tyler Borgula (USHL), F Chris Pelosi (USHL), F Jack Ricketts (Holy Cross), F Michael Salandra (BCHL), F Aaron Schwartz (BCHL), G Dylan Silverstein (USHL), F Ryan Smith (USHL), F Jeremy Wilmer (BU)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 7
Incoming Class Rank: 1
Projected Offensive Rank: 1
Quinnipiac lost an astounding amount of important players this offseason. Their entire top line of Lipkin - Quillan - Graf is off to the pros, each earning an entry level contract with NHL teams. They also lost two of their top defensemen in Jayden Lee and Charles-Alexis Legault, and other key players that are listed up top. It is no doubt a lot to replace.
If any team is equipped to replace that scoring though, it’s Quinnipiac, and the model thinks they did an excellent job of replacing all of their losses through the portal and with incoming freshmen. The players they return are pretty good as well, so the newcomers and returners combine to give the Bobcats a great projected offense.
Marcellus, Treloar and Cerbone are 3 great forwards, all of whom had 24+ points last season. They help soften the blow in the top 6. Joining them are two great transfer additions in Jeremy Wilmer and Jack Ricketts.
Starting with Wilmer, he is without a doubt one of the top transfer portal pickups in the country, and he is rated as the top newcomer for the entire ECAC by the model. It’s easy to see why. He had 36 points in 38 games last year for a BU team that made the Frozen Four. Wilmer is undersized, and he is much more of a playmaker than a scorer. That has never stopped him from putting up big numbers though, and I expect that to continue with Quinnipiac.
Jack Ricketts was a top player in Atlantic Hockey last season with 35 points in 39 games. He has the versatility to play both center and wing, so he will slide right into the top 6 wherever the Bobcats need him.
Outside of those 2, there’s a lot of key freshmen who will be vying for roles as Quinnipiac fills out the rest of its top 9. Tyler Borgula had 51 points in the USHL. Chris Pelosi is a 3rd round draft pick of the Boston Bruins and had 55 points in the USHL. Michael Salandra had a point per game in the BCHL and can contribute in the bottom 6. Aaron Schwartz had a whopping 81 points in the BCHL. Ryan Smith had 38 points in the USHL. Those are all freshmen who could contribute, but it’ll be interesting to see which ones grab which roles.
From the blue line, both Davis Pennington and Cooper Moore return after showing good two-way play last season with 20+ points and good defense to go along with it. Outside of them, Quinnipiac loses all its regulars on defense from last season. Most of the defensemen they bring in to replace them are defensively minded and don’t project to put up big numbers.
I do like what Quinnipiac has offensively, but it’ll come down to how well all these new pieces come together. They also need those aforementioned freshmen to adjust to college hockey quickly and smoothly to have the scoring depth that they have been accustomed to the past few years.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 1
Here’s where I definitely disagree with the model. The model likes Quinnipiac’s defense a lot. I like it too, but the model is too high in my opinion.
The reason the model likes it a lot is because it doesn’t view Jayden Lee, Charles-Alexis Legault and CJ McGee as huge losses defensively. McGee was good on the 3rd pair, so that’s fine. Jayden Lee was a top defenseman on the team though, and even though his offensive impact was definitely better than defensive, I think the model is underrating his contributions there. Legault’s defensive contributions are no doubt being undervalued.
Those players being undervalued means the model doesn’t view Quinnipiac as having lost a lot of defensive production. That’s why I personally rate them lower than the model.
It’s worth noting they do have some good newcomers on the backend. Bohlinger was a good 4 year contributor at UMass and should fit in well. Leddy and Benoit are 2 NHL draft picks who transferred out of blue blood schools looking for more ice time. Neither projects to add a ton of offense, but both should be good 2-way guys. Lastly, Bruins draft pick Elliott Groenewold comes in and will play a role as a big, athletic shutdown defenseman.
Lastly, I have no worries about Quinnipiac in net. Marinov had a good freshman year as the backup, and given that and his USHL pedigree, they shouldn’t miss a beat there.
I do think that given Quinnipiac’s system and the talent of these players, they will still be quite good defensively. I just don’t think they’re worthy of being projected to be the #1 team defensively in the ECAC.
Overall, while I’m more skeptical than the model of Quinnipiac as a whole just because of all the newcomers, I think they’re still an elite team. To me, they’re a no doubt NCAA tournament team, and even though I have them #2, they could easily make me look silly for doubting them despite a bit of a rebuilding year.
2. Cornell (Last Year: 2)
My Ranking: 1
The model got Cornell right last year like it did Quinnipiac (and then it got much worse). The model has Cornell and Quinnipiac as the top 2 teams in the conference and then, everyone else fighting below them. I agree there, and I actually have Cornell above Quinnipiac for reasons I’ll get into.
Outside of that, Cornell probably had the biggest and strangest move of the offseason in poaching Casey Jones from Clarkson to be their associate coach. This is Mike Schafer’s last season as head coach before retiring, and then Casey Jones will take over for him. Cannot say I’ve ever seen a move like that before, but it will certainly be good for Cornell in terms of keeping continuity for the program and having a smooth transition.
Key Losses: F Gabriel Seger (44 points in 35 games)
Key Returners: F Dalton Bancroft (31 points in 34 games), F Kyle Penney (28 points in 35 games), F Jonathan Castagna (25 points in 35 games), D Ben Robertson (23 points in 35 games), F Ryan Walsh (22 points in 35 games), F Ondrej Psenicka (21 points in 35 games), F Sullivan Mack (17 points in 29 games), D Tim Rego (10 points in 35 games), D Hoyt Stanley (10 points in 35 games), G Ian Shane (0.923 SV%)
Key Newcomers: F Charlie Major (USHL)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 1
Incoming Class Rank: 6
Projected Offensive Rank: 4
If you want to know why I’m optimistic about Cornell, just take a look at the key losses vs the key returners. Not only is Cornell only losing one key player, that player is their ONLY skater they don’t return to the team. Period.
I have never seen that before in my time covering the league, and that is part of the reason that the model is underrating Cornell’s offense. I haven’t created a model to predict player progression. I’d want to put a lot of time into it to make it thorough and accurate, and I simply don’t have that time. That lack of player progression prediction means that Cornell is unfairly hurt by the model because they return everyone. In a way, it doubly hurts them because they had a very young team last year with lots of freshmen contributors, and those players should progress extremely well given how young and talented they are.
However, despite that being a blind spot for the model, I am VERY bullish on them. Returning 5 players with 20+ points is a lot, and there are 3 other players who had 10+ points also returning. Then, you add in Charlie Major, who was one of the best players in the USHL with 70 points, and their top 9 looks outstanding even if the returners don’t progress. We all know they will progress though, so Cornell should be loaded up front. I don’t even want to get too much into individual players because this would get too long if I did.
Just to talk about a couple though: Dalton Bancroft returns after being an All-ECAC selection, and he should once again be great for the Big Red up front. The player I’d be most excited about if I were a Cornell fan would be Castagna though. He is one of the best skaters I’ve ever seen enter the league, and he has the skill and the size to pair with it. He came straight from Canadian prep school and had 25 points, which is extremely impressive. I’m expecting a big jump from him as he is one of the most purely talented players in the league right now, if not the most talented player.
On the blue line, Cornell returns every single one of their players from last season. They are led by Ben Robertson, who was one of the top defensemen in the ECAC as just a freshman last season. He had 23 points and was very good defensively to go with it. Outside of him, both Rego and Stanley had 10 points last year and are great 2 way defensemen. I expect that Robertson and Stanley will take big steps forward after playing key roles as young freshmen last year.
Cornell has a lot of talent when you sum it all up, and the model does like their offense. As I said though, they should be even higher than 4th in the conference offensively given all that they’re returning.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 3
The projected defensive ranking is less about Cornell and more about how the model has Quinnipiac (and Clarkson who we will get to) overrated defensively. Cornell is projected to have an outstanding defense just like last season when they led the nation in goals against per game.
Unsurprisingly, when you return your entire blue line and your starting goaltender who won ECAC goalie of the year, the model is going to like your defense. It has their projected goals against per game right around where it was last season.
I already talked about Robertson, Rego, and Stanley, but Kempf, Fegaras, and Suda were all also strong defensively behind them. That group of 6 players will keep Cornell great at controlling puck possession and limiting shots and chances against.
Lastly, they have great goaltending, not that they need it given how good the defense is. Ian Shane returns for his senior year with a career 0.923 SV% and 11 career shutouts. The reigning ECAC goalie of the year gives Cornell a rock in net, and he’ll be relied on to start basically every game in the season for them.
Overall, Cornell is a team that seems to have a very high floor because of the crazy lack of roster turnover. They return 17/18 of the skaters in their lineup and their starting goalie, and they have a top USHL recruit to fill that 18th spot. Barring a catastrophe, they will be an excellent team once again.
However, they not only have a high floor, but I think their ceiling is quite high too. They were very young last season and have a lot of talent, and those players are only going to grow even more due to playing big roles early on in their careers. The younger players taking big jumps would make Cornell an even more dangerous team than they appear. For those reasons and Quinnipiac’s aforementioned question marks, I’m going out on a bit of limb and putting them ahead of Quinnipiac in the #1 spot even if the model still has Cornell trailing.
3. Clarkson (Last Year: 5)
My Ranking: 6
I have no idea what to make of Clarkson anymore. They’ve continued to recruit well and accumulate talent. When they finished 6th in 22-23, I just chalked it up to a random down year which is going to happen every once in awhile. Quinnipiac finished 9th in 17-18 as a brief dip before returning to be a top team, so I thought Clarkson would be similar. Then, they had another down year that went pretty much the same way. They only went down to 5th when I had them picked for 3rd, but it still felt like they should have been a decent amount better.
My best guess? First, I’d say offense and scoring. They’ve been below the national average in scoring both of these years despite their talent. I don’t know if it’s system, players underperforming, lack of chemistry, or what (probably some combination). They need to improve there though.
The second is goaltending. It’s not like the goaltending has been awful or anything, but it’s been below average. Clarkson got really accustomed to great goaltending during their reign in the top 4 with guys like Marotte and Kielly, but it hasn’t been anywhere close to that these 2 years.
This is all not even including the strange offseason. I don’t think anyone saw Casey Jones moving to Cornell coming, at least not now. It didn’t have too much of an impact roster-wise. They lost a few recruits and Jesse Tucker entered the portal, but that’s pretty much it. What Clarkson has going for it though is they made an excellent hire with J.F. Houle.
Summing it all up though, it makes Clarkson extremely difficult to predict this year. I very much don’t agree with the model’s assessment of their defense, which is why the model has Clarkson so high.
Key Losses: F Mathieu Gosselin (28 points in 31 games), F Anthony Romano (25 points in 27 games), F Cody Monds (15 points in 30 games), D Jack Judson (7 points in 35 games)
Key Returners: F Ayrton Martino (27 points in 31 games), F Ryan Richardson (23 points in 35 games), D Trey Taylor (17 points in 35 games), F Ryan Taylor (16 points in 24 games), D Tristan Sarsland (12 points in 34 games), D Kaelan Taylor (6 points in 34 games)
Key Newcomers: F Ryan Bottrill (Brown), G Marcus Brannman (Providence), D Ty Brassington (BCHL), F Garrett Dahm (Mercyhurst), F Ray Fust (Omaha), G Ethan Langenegger (Lake State), F Jared Mangan (USHL), F Luka Sukovic (AJHL)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 11
Incoming Class Rank: 5
Projected Offensive Rank: 8
I agree with the model’s assessment of Clarkson’s offense. They are losing a lot to graduation and transfer. They only return 3 forwards who had 0.5 points per game or more. While those guys are good, Clarkson doesn’t seem to have the necessary depth behind them. This is a team that struggled offensively last year and returns the 2nd least scoring in the conference.
For the players returning, Martino is elite and there’s no questions about him. Clarkson can count on him to give them a point per game and around 30 points. The two Ryans (Richardson and Taylor) can be reliably counted on to play well in the top 6 given their point production history.
After that trio, the next best forwards had less than 10 points. That’s a big drop off, and it explains why the offense ranked low.
Luckily, Clarkson does have some good incoming forwards that bumps them up. Transfers Garrett Dahm and Ryan Bottrill are both players who should slide right into the top 6. Dahm had 28 points for Mercyhurst last year, and while he likely won’t produce quite that much in the ECAC, he’s a pretty safe bet to be a solid 2nd liner. Bottrill had two great years with Brown before transferring with 40 points in 2 seasons.
The issue is that there’s a drop off after those two, much like the drop off in returning production. Jared Mangan was pretty good in the USHL, and he projects to be a good middle 6 player but not a huge needle mover. After him, Fust projects as a 3rd liner and Sukovic projects as a bottom 6 guy. Solid players, but you need more real contributors before you hit guys like that in the lineup.
On the blue line, Trey Taylor and Tristan Sarsland both can contribute offensively, and I’d expect both to be in that 10-20 point range again this season. They also bring in Brassington who was great in the BCHL, and Tate Taylor who was solid in the USHL. Neither of them will put up huge numbers, but they can definitely contribute at least a little bit offensively.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 2
Here is where the main disagreement comes. The model has Clarkson’s defense improving, significantly. The main reason why has to do with losing Noah Beck and Dustyn McFaul. Last season, Beck and McFaul were awful defensively. They were -17 and -8 on a team that was +1 at even strength. That’s horrendous. The model views losing them as addition by subtraction essentially. I agree with that, but only to a certain extent.
The model is overrating the improvement that comes with losing those 2 players, in my opinion. It’s projecting them to improve by about a goal against per game, which is way too much for two players, no matter how bad defensively they were. Disregarding the model for a second though, Trey Taylor and Sarsland were both great defensively in addition to their offense last season, and Kaelan Taylor was pretty solid and returns for a 5th year. It’s not like there should be no optimism at all; I just think the model is overstating it.
In net, Clarkson should improve with Ethan Langenegger who was consistently solid for Lake State his entire career there. He doesn’t seem like he’ll be an elite goaltender, but he should be reliable. If he isn’t, Clarkson also added Marcus Brannman who was good in the USHL before going to Providence and not playing much at all last season.
Lastly, it’s really hard to predict Clarkson defensively given they’ll be under a new head coach with an entirely new system. Casey Jones had a very defensive style that was a big factor in their defensive success. I think Houle is unlikely to play that defensive of a style. With all of his pro experience in the past decade, I’d expect more of a pro-style game.
Overall, Clarkson has the potential to match this ranking. If they get good contributions from the newcomers and a lot of development from returners, 3-12 should once again be pretty close in the ECAC. I just can’t trust that they do it. They have less talent than in years past and underwent the coaching change in the offseason. Most coaches struggle initially in rebuilds, and while I don’t think Clarkson is in a true rebuild since they were never bad even in these two down years, I don’t think a new coach will be plug and play with improvement like it was at BU or Wisconsin. For that reason, I’m putting them 6, which is more of an indicator of the ECAC being tight in the middle again rather than me disliking Clarkson.
4. Dartmouth (Last Year: 4)
My Ranking: 3
I absolutely LOVE Dartmouth this year. I really like what Reid Cashman is doing there (as does everyone else). Last year was their RPI 19-20 year where they came out of nowhere to finish top 4, and unlike RPI, they’re not going to be stopped by COVID. It’s kind of funny because the model did have them in 12th last year, but if you go back and read what I wrote, I actually liked what they were building there even back then. Here’s my opening statement on them.
They did burn me, and those core pieces developed into high-end pieces. Now, almost all of those players are back for more with only 2 key losses in the offseason. With all of that talent returning and a great recruiting class, Dartmouth should be even better than last year.
Key Losses: F Joey Musa (17 points in 32 games), G Cooper Black (0.910 SV%)
Key Returners: F Luke Haymes (36 points in 31 games), F Cooper Flinton (25 points in 30 games), D CJ Foley (20 points in 32 games), F Nikita Nikora (20 points in 25 games), D John Fusco (17 points in 32 games), F Braiden Dorfman (17 points in 29 games), F Sean Chisholm (17 points in 28 games), D Eric Charpentier (11 points in 32 games), D Matt Fusco (11 points in 28 games), D Ian Pierce (11 points in 21 games)
Key Newcomers: F Hank Cleaves (BCHL), G Emmett Croteau (Clarkson), D Colin Grable (USHL), F Austin Salani (NAHL), F Hayden Stavroff (BCHL)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 2
Incoming Class Rank: 4
Projected Offensive Rank: 2
That list above should give a pretty good idea of why both I and the model are high on Dartmouth. They return ECAC All-League selection Luke Haymes after he broke out with 36 points on the year, and he should once again be the go-to guy up front. The entire top line returns, in fact, with Flinton and Nikora returning too. That was a great top line last year, and they all return with chemistry already built up and more individual development.
Sean Chisholm and Braiden Dorfman also return and should be mainstays on the 2nd line after good seasons last year. They can both put up 20+ points this season pretty easily since they were close last year.
Dartmouth’s offense was solid but nothing spectacular last year because after those players in the top 6, they did not have depth. This year, with their great recruiting class, they will have the depth. Hank Cleaves and Hayden Stavroff were two of the best players in the BCHL. Both had above a point per game and 50+ points in total. They should add immediate offense in the middle of the lineup. Salani isn’t quite on their level, but he had 70 points in the NAHL last year and should fit in on the 3rd line. Those players will give them a great top 9 now.
On the blue line, Dartmouth returns everyone, and quite a few of them were good offensively last year. There’s no reason to think it’d be different this year. It starts with the reigning ECAC rookie of the year, CJ Foley, and it continues with the Fusco brothers. Those 3 give Dartmouth a great right side of the defense. On the left side, Eric Charpentier returns after a great freshman year, and Ian Pierce will be back as well. I have always particularly liked Pierce’s game, and I think he’s flying under the radar right now because he was injured for a big chunk of last season.
Overall, it adds up to the 2nd best offense per the model, and it’s why I’m quite high on Dartmouth.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 4
Dartmouth should be quite good defensively too. They gave up 2.84 goals against per game last year, which is about average, and I see them improving on that. They return their entire blue line as I mentioned before, and with the talent and youth they have there, they should only get better.
I think a lot of people might question having them this high on defense after Cooper Black signed an NHL deal, but I’m not too worried about them in net. I thought they made a very good move by bringing in Emmett Croteau through the transfer portal. Both the model and I like him despite his struggles last season. While he did struggle for sure, he only played in 6 games, which is a very small sample size. In comparison, he has a 79 game sample size of great goaltending in the USHL, which was good enough for the Canadiens to pick him in the NHL draft prior to going to Clarkson.
I’m far more inclined to trust a 79 game sample over a 6 game one, and I think he’ll be a reliable starter in net for the Big Green. Goaltending can be pretty unpredictable, so if Croteau falls flat again, and Dartmouth gets bad goaltending, they definitely won’t finish this high. There’s some inherent risk in this projection because of that, but at this stage of the rankings and below, every team is going to have flaws.
Overall, I’m pretty bullish on Dartmouth and their ability to continue building up. It makes sense given how their roster looks on paper. That doesn’t even just mean within the ECAC either; I think they can be a bubble team for the NCAA tournament. I don’t think they make it, but they can get close, which is saying a lot given where they were when Reid Cashman took over.
5. Colgate (Last Year: 3)
My Ranking: 5
Colgate finished 3rd last year after I had them in 8th. Colgate is a team the model has consistently been getting wrong at this point, and it’s been for two main reasons that I’ve noticed. Their recruits have been outperforming expectations as freshmen, in many cases far surpassing what they should be doing based on their pedigree from junior hockey. The second reason is all their players have been developing quite well and frequently taking big jumps in their development while playing at Colgate.
The staff at Colgate under Don Vaughn and now Mike Harders deserve lots of credit because it’s a true testament to them that they consistently have outperformed their on-paper talent. You need really good evaluation to find recruits that outplay what they did in juniors, and you also need really good development to have your players be improving over their college careers as well as Colgate’s players have.
This year, the model seems to have finally caught up and given them a good rating. Them dropping out of the top 4 is more due to the projected ratings of the teams around them. Make no mistake though, this should be a very good team.
Key Losses: F Ross Mitton (30 points in 34 games), F Ryan McGuire (26 points in 34 games), D Nick Anderson (21 points in 36 games), F Ethan Manderville (19 points in 36 games), D Pierson Brandon (15 points in 34 games), G Carter Gylander (0.901 SV%)
Key Returners: F Daniel Panetta (29 points in 36 games), F Simon Labelle (27 points in 36 games), F Brett Chorske (27 points in 35 games), D Tommy Bergsland (26 points in 36 games), F Alex DiPaolo (23 points in 26 games), F Jake Schneider (18 points in 35 games), D Reid Irwin (13 points in 36 games), D Nic Belpedio (5 points in 9 games), D Bobby Metz (4 points in 36 games)
Key Newcomers: F Jack Brandt (USHL), F Simone Dadie (BCHL), D Antonio Fernandez (Colorado College), D Brett Merner (BCHL), F Max Nagel (USHL), D Michael Neumeier (USHL), F Ryan Spinale (USHL)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 4
Incoming Class Rank: 3
Projected Offensive Rank: 3
Colgate is interesting offensively this season because they lose some key guys that played big roles for them last year, but they also return a lot of scoring despite that.
Mitton and McGuire played pretty big roles in the top 6 last year, so they’re big losses no doubt. Manderville was more of a middle 6 guy, so he is more replaceable but still a loss. Anderson was also a great offensive defenseman on the backend.
Despite those losses, Colgate was so explosive offensively last season that they still return 4 players who had 20+ points. Panetta could have been an All-ECAC pick last year, and Chorske and Labelle were both excellent with 27 points apiece. Their best forward might actually be Alex DiPaolo though. He’s another player that I feel is going under the radar right now due to missing time last year with injuries. Lastly, they return Jake Schneider after he made the ECAC All-Rookie team. That’s a really good group of forwards to bring back.
They’re joined by some good incoming freshmen. Max Nagel was very good start to finish in Madison last year, and Ryan Spinale produced in both the BCHL and USHL. Those two would be my top picks for impact freshmen for them. Dadie is a weird one; he had 9 points in 23 games in the NAHL and then moved up to the BCHL and had 33 points in 31 games. I have no idea what to make of that. Brandt never really impressed me in Madison, but he’s a solid option for the bottom 6 and adds depth to the forward group.
The defensemen will also add a lot of offense for Colgate. Bergsland was an All-ECAC pick after a breakout year with 26 points. Irwin had 13 points and has been a good top 4 guy since transferring from Denver. Belpedio only played in 9 games last season due to injury, but he should be back healthy this season. He’s capable of being a top pairing offensive minded defenseman, so it’ll be big for Colgate to have him healthy again. Those 3 players will be great puck-movers and offensive drivers for them.
For newcomers, I really liked the move to bring in Antonio Fernandez from Colorado College. Fernandez was excellent in the USHL with 40 points the year before going to CC, but then, he only appeared in 2 games for the Tigers before choosing to transfer. He is undersized at only 5’8, but he has undeniable offensive talent that should bolster Colgate.
They also bring in Michael Neumeier from the USHL after he had a very good season with Fargo. He had 28 points in 62 games and was also a +28. He has size and a good two way game, and given that he’s an overager with 3 years of junior hockey, he should be more than ready to play right away. I’m not quite sure what his role will be given Colgate’s talent and depth, but he’s a good player.
Then, last but not least, Brett Merner had 42 points in 54 games for Nanaimo in the BCHL last season. He was easily one of the best defensemen in the league who is good enough to contribute immediately. The question for him is the same as Neumeier: I’m not sure how much ice time he’ll get to start.
Colgate has a lot of talent despite their losses and should be in line to have a pretty good team offensively once again. Both the forward group and the defensemen are filled with players able to contribute offensively, and they have a good mix of high-end talent and depth. I’m not expecting Colgate to take that much of a step back offensively, and I could even foresee them matching or improving on last year if things go their way.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 6
Colgate was below average defensively last season, and they’re expected to be right around there again this season.
Pierson Brandon was a big loss defensively for Colgate as he was consistently one of the top shutdown defensemen in the league over his career. His loss hurts a lot. Nick Anderson isn’t as big of a loss defensively; he was a more offensive-minded player.
What evens out the losses of those 2 is the fact that Colgate returns everyone else. The rest of their defensemen were generally all pretty good, and that helps soften the blow. I already mentioned a lot of contributors in the section above, but here, I want to highlight Bobby Metz who had extremely good defensive impacts in his role last year. He didn’t provide much offense, but he was a very important player for Colgate and will likely be relied upon in a similar manner this year.
The big question mark for Colgate is in net. The 3 goaltenders on the roster have a combined 8 games of NCAA experience after Gylander held down the net the past few years. They have basically no sample size to go off of. The model is projecting the goaltending to be below average for that reason, which is fair. There’s a huge range of outcomes with that much uncertainty at the position, so I see goaltending really making or breaking Colgate this year. If they have a break-out at the position, they could get as high as 3rd again given the rest of the roster. But if it’s truly awful, they could fall as far as 8 or 9 given how tight the ECAC is. I feel that their current projection is pretty fair with what we know.
Overall, Colgate is a talented and exciting team this season. They have returning and incoming players who should give them a good offense once again. The defense will be the area to watch. They will need it to be stronger this year if they want to finish top 4 once again because the rest of the league is improving. I think the model is pretty bang on with Colgate and have them finishing 5th as well.
6. Harvard (Last Year: 8)
My Ranking: 4
I want to take a victory lap on Harvard’s prediction last year. I had them 7th because of them losing basically all of their best players, and I got called crazy for having them that low. I pretty much nailed it though; they had a down year because they couldn’t replace all the talent they lost. They even finished one spot lower than I had them!
This year, Harvard should be improved now that their youthful team will be developing. They didn’t lack talent last year; it’s just that the team was filled with 18 and 19 year old freshmen. Now those players will be older and more experienced, and they will add some good freshmen to the mix. They also lose basically nobody; they return a whopping 98% of their scoring from last season.
Key Losses: None
Key Returners: F Joe Miller (27 points in 32 games), D Ryan Healey (22 points in 29 games), F Cam Johnson (16 points in 32 games), D Ian Moore (8 points in 21 games), G Aku Koskenvuo (0.910 SV%)
Key Newcomers: G Ben Charette (AJHL), F William Hughes (USHL), F Will McDonough (USHL), F Justin Solovey (USHL), D Lucas St. Louis (USHL), F Mick Thompson (USHL)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 5
Incoming Class Rank: 2
Projected Offensive Rank: 5
Returning 98% of their scoring and having no key losses is why I like Harvard this year. It’s pretty similar to Cornell in that they return not only important players, but the players are also pretty young. The fact that Harvard had so many younger players since they usually bring in younger freshmen should bode well for development. Players develop more the younger they are.
That’s also part of the reason that I think Harvard will outperform the model. You can pretty much just copy and paste my explanation for Cornell. Since the model doesn’t factor in player progression the way it should, Harvard is hurt by returning so many young players.
Getting into those players, Joe Miller is an elite forward in the league who will once again be counted on to lead the attack for Harvard. Behind him, rising sophomores Cam Johnson, Michael Callow, and Ben MacDonald will be back after solid freshmen seasons. They should all progress into top 6 forwards this year.
Harvard also returns star defenseman Ryan Healey. Healey had a breakout year with 22 points in 29 games as a top defenseman in the league. He will be joined by Ian Moore who struggled with injuries last season. In 22-23 though, Moore had 19 points in 34 games and was a +20, so he’s shown the ability to be great as well. If he stays healthy this year, I’d expect him to bounce back.
Harvard supplements that returning talent with a good recruiting class. Up front, William Hughes and Will McDonough should be able to contribute in the bottom 6 right away after each played 2 solid years in the USHL. Justin Solovey had 47 points in 55 games and should be an offensive contributor right away in the middle 6 or top 6. Mick Thompson is possibly Harvard’s best recruit coming in though as he had 63 points in the USHL last year, which was good for 16th in the league. He should be in the top 6 from the get-go. Last but not least, Lucas St. Louis had 29 points in 43 games last year with Dubuque in the USHL and was a top offensive defenseman in the league. Harvard’s best defensemen were all right shots, so St. Louis will be able to help solidify the left side.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 8
Harvard’s defense struggled last year with all the inexperience and youth. Much like the offense, they return all key players though and will likely improve. Similarly, I think the model underestimates that improvement. Last year, their defense was 10th in the league in goals against per game, so going up to 8th is a jump. My opinion is that it’ll be a bigger jump than that.
In net, Harvard should be pretty settled. Aku Koskenvuo had a good year taking over for Mitch Gibson, and he had a 0.910 SV% in his first year as the starter. His pedigree is good as an NHL draft pick, and he started to prove his talent last year. Not having a question mark in net should be big for the defense in terms of comfort. The defensemen can play more freely without needing to grip the sticks tight in fear of making a mistake. Most teams when you get to this spot in the rankings will have goaltending questions, so that’s another reason why I see Harvard being higher. Koskenvuo gives them a reliable starter.
I’m expecting Harvard’s combination of returning players, development, and incoming freshmen to progress them forward this season. Last year was a rebuilding year, and this year should be a step back in the right direction. They’re still a year or two away from returning to the national conversation like they were before, but I think they just sneak into the top 4 this year. Even if they’re just in the top 6 instead of top 4, it’s still a good move up the standings for them.
7. Union (Last Year: 6)
My Ranking: 7
I had Union 9 last year, and they had a bit of a breakout to surpass that and finish 6th. Josh Hauge has the program moving in the right direction, and I’m expecting Union to be a pretty solid team once again. I think the model pretty much has them right on.
Last year, Union was an interesting team because they were quite explosive offensively but struggled defensively. Since most of that team returns, they are projected to be pretty similar this year.
Key Losses: F Ville Immonen (24 points in 36 games), F Liam Robertson (23 points in 34 games), F Chaz Smedsrud (22 points in 37 games), F Ben Tupker (19 points in 34 games), D Nathan Kelly (8 points in 35 games)
Key Returners: D John Prokop (35 points in 36 games), F Caden Villegas (30 points in 37 games), F Josh Nixon (27 points in 36 games), F Nate Hanley (26 points in 37 games), F Brandon Buhr (24 points in 35 games), D Cullen Ferguson (18 points in 37 games)
Key Newcomers: F Ben Muthersbaugh (USHL), F Drew Sutton (NAHL)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 3
Incoming Class Rank: 11
Projected Offensive Rank: 6
In terms of returning scoring, Union is in a similar position as Colgate, Dartmouth and Harvard. All are really close together in terms of the amount of returning scoring. The difference is that the other 3 all had good recruiting classes, and Union did not.
Union lost 4 out of its top 8 forwards, so the fact they rank that high in returning production is a nod to their explosive offense last year. The players they return were really productive and will be anchors in their top 6. Villegas has dynamic speed and is back after his breakout 30 point season, a jump from 13 points the year prior. Josh Nixon has been a consistent point producer in his college career and had a career high 27 points last year. Nate Hanley has been a very good top 6 center right from the beginning at Union. He was a little snakebit last year, but he still turned in 26 points despite that. Brandon Buhr transferred in after half a year at Clarkson before returning to the BCHL, and he was great in the top 6 all year.
On the blue line, Prokop returns after his outstanding year where he was 1st team All-ECAC. Ferguson had a very good year as well and returns after breaking out offensively with 18 points. Cal Mell was more productive offensively as a freshman than last year and has the ability to be a good top 4 defenseman as well.
Those are great players, but there is a huge drop off after them. The schools ahead of Union were able to supplement their cores with good incoming freshmen, but Union’s recruiting class is poor. Muthersbaugh was solid in the USHL when he was healthy and looks like he’ll play in the middle 6. Sutton was a point per game player in the NAHL, so he’s more of a bottom 6 player. The rest of the class is uninspiring and doesn’t project to contribute. This leaves Union with a lack of offensive depth, which is why they’re projected 6th in overall offense.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 9
On defense, Union is projected to be pretty similar to last year. While they did return most of the blue line, they also lost Nathan Kelly. Kelly was a key shutdown defenseman who had strong defensive impacts. They are still projected to improve overall by returning the rest of the defensemen, but losing Kelly mitigates the projected improvement.
In net, Kyle Chauvette returns after he struggled as a full time starter. He only had a 0.893 SV% last year, which is really poor, especially for a full time starter. Union could have taken even more of a step forward if he had been better. Goaltending is the single most important position in hockey, so Union’s defensive projection is hurt a lot by it. 9th feels like a reasonable projection given the defensemen and goaltending.
The good news for Union is that they’re still projected for 9th defensively despite that. If Chauvette plays better this year, that can vault Union ahead of some the teams ahead of them pretty easily. As I said, once you hit 3rd in the standings, it is pretty tight margins. Better goaltending and defense would be an easy way for Union to prove this ranking wrong.
Overall, I’m pretty much in agreement with the model on Union. Union’s high octane style both ways will make them interesting to watch, and they will be dangerous if they tighten things up in their own end.
8. Brown (Last Year: 11)
My Ranking: 9
I pretty much nailed my Brown projection last season. I really liked the young talent they had coming in, but questioned their depth scoring. I was also low on their defense due to losing most of their top 4 and Mathieu Caron. I ultimately had them in 10th and they finished 11th.
This year, the model (and I) both like Brown to improve because they can now build off of that young talent they brought in last year. Brown has a good core of players, and they bring in some good recruits that I really like. Their issue will be depth and surrounding pieces to support those players.
Key Losses: F Ryan Bottrill (19 points in 30 games)
Key Returners: F Ryan St. Louis (24 points in 30 games), F Tyler Kopff (18 points in 30 games), F Max Scott (18 points in 22 games), D Alex Pineau (15 points in 30 games), D Ethan Mistry (11 points in 30 games), D Nick Traggio (4 points in 26 games), G Lawton Zacher (0.909 SV%)
Key Newcomers: F Tanner Hartmann (Hobart), F Brian Nicholas (USHL), F Ivan Zadvernyuk (NAHL)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 8
Incoming Class Rank: 9
Projected Offensive Rank: 11
The main issue that Brown has is depth. They have a nice trio of forwards in St. Louis, Kopff and Scott. Scott unfortunately missed a lot of time with injuries, but when healthy, he was trending towards being an ECAC All-Rookie selection. St. Louis was dynamite right from the jump, and he ended up leading the team in scoring.
Losing Bottrill was a big loss for Brown, and they could really use him and his playmaking. He would have added another top 6 forward. Kopff is a really good returner but is more suited for the 2nd line than the top line. For newcomers, Brian Nicholas projects to be the top newcomer. He had nearly a point per game in the USHL with 57 points in 62 games. That was a HUGE recruiting win for Brown, and he’ll play in their top 6 immediately.
While Brown does have a couple other good recruits, it drops off pretty heavily after Nicholas. I like the pickup of Tanner Hartmann from Hobart in D3. He was 4th in D3 hockey in points with 45 in 31 games. I think he will be able to contribute in a middle 6 role, but he’s not a true top 6 player. Zadvernyuk was good in the NAHL, but he projects as more of a 3rd line player. On good teams, these two would be lower in the lineup, but Brown will need them to play in the top 6.
After those 6 forwards, the roster is filled up with depth players, which is Brown’s biggest issue. Barring players having steep development out of nowhere, Brown is going to have major issues with depth scoring.
The blue line does look a bit more equipped in terms of scoring. Pineau and Mistry had great freshmen years with 15 and 11 points, respectively. Brett Bliss has been a steady player for Brown throughout his career and should be again as a senior.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 7
Brown’s defense should be solid, which helps their ranking. They return every single one of their defensemen from last season, so they should see improvement in terms of shots allowed and chances allowed. In addition to the already mentioned dmen, Nick Traggio was a key shutdown defenseman and should fill that role once again.
The biggest returner though is Lawton Zacher. He had a great freshman year in the net for Brown with a 0.909 SV%. With him back, Brown has a goalie they know they can count on. That’s a big boost defensively, and another reason why they should improve. Honestly, the model might even be underrating the improvement Brown will see from returning all these players.
Brown has a good young core, and I think they’re being underestimated by many. I didn’t agree with the coaches putting them 12th. They’ve got enough young talent that they can challenge for top 8. The model has them 8, and I have them 9. Their lack of depth lowers their ceiling, but I don’t see them at the bottom of the conference.
9. Princeton (Last Year: 9)
My Ranking: 10
Princeton was a pretty big miss by the model last year, projecting them to finish 4th at the front of a very tight pack of 6 teams. That missed, and they ended up finishing towards the back of that tight grouping. It’s weird to say, but the model actually got Princeton right in a lot of ways. It just missed on the most important one, goaltending.
Princeton ended up undergoing a coaching change after the season. Ben Syer is now the head coach after being an assistant at Cornell for a number of years. In terms of on the ice, Princeton does lose a decent amount of scoring. Half of their top 6 and half of their top 4 graduated, so there might be a step back. Defensively, it’d be almost impossible not to improve just generally, but I’m also curious to see what the coaching change does from a systematic standpoint since Syer comes from such a structured defensive team at Cornell.
Conventional wisdom suggests that year 1 of a rebuild is pretty much always going to be a tough year. Even though Princeton does have some talent, I don’t think they’ll be immune to that rule of thumb this year.
Key Losses: F Adam Robbins (29 points in 30 games), F Nick Seitz (23 points in 30 games), F Ian Murphy (23 points in 25 games), D Nick Carabin (17 points in 27 games)
Key Returners: F David Jacobs (24 points in 30 games), F Brendan Gorman (24 points in 29 games), F Kai Daniells (19 points in 30 games), F Jack Cronin (19 points in 26 games), D Noah de la Durantaye (18 points in 29 games), D Tyler Rubin (13 points in 30 games)
Key Newcomers: F Drew Garzone (BCHL), F Miles Gunty (USHL), F Luc Pelletier (BCHL)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 6
Incoming Class Rank: 8
Projected Offensive Rank: 9
Princeton returns some pretty good players. David Jacobs and Brendan Gorman had great years with 24 points after each was also an immediate impact freshman. They’ll be relied on in the top 6 this year, and they shouldn’t have any problems delivering. The two of them should make up 2/3 of Princeton’s top line.
Behind them, Kai Daniells returns after a great freshman year with 19 points. He made an immediate impact as the 2nd line center, and they’ll be looking to him to anchor that second line and ideally take a step forward like Jacobs and Gorman did. Jack Cronin returns to add some senior leadership and scoring. He also had 19 points last year and will fill a role in the top 6 on the wing. He will either give Princeton a dynamic top line next to Jacobs and Gorman or give balance to the top 6 by pairing with Daniells.
The issue at forward is that there’s a huge drop off after those four players. The next highest returning forward had 7 points last season. There’s some incoming freshmen that are solid, but they are all 3rd line or bottom 6 type players. Miles Gunty had a good year in the USHL and would be a solid 3rd line player, but he’ll likely have to play in the top 6. Drew Garzone and Luc Pelletier both had good years in the BCHL, but they didn’t dominate or anything. They both project to be bottom 6 players as freshmen.
For defensemen, Noah de la Durantaye returns after a great year with 18 points. He is in line to have another great year. Tyler Rubin was very good both ways for Princeton last year and is probably their most well-rounded defenseman. Those two will be relied on a lot. Princeton does lose Nick Carabin though, which is a pretty big loss after he had 17 points last season. The next best returning defenseman had 2 points last season, so they also lack offensive depth on the backend too.
Princeton will need to really rely on their top players this year because of the lack of secondary scoring. Barring some big emergences from unexpected players, I think that’s going to make it difficult for them to reach the offensive levels they had last season.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 11
Princeton’s main issue was defense last season; they allowed 3.80 goals against per game. While they are projected to improve, they are starting from such a low point that the model is still projecting them towards the bottom of the league.
Rubin is a big returner for Princeton; he was their best defensive defenseman last season (and had good offense to go with it). His return is countered by the loss of Nick Carabin though. Other defensemen like de la Durantaye and Wang struggled defensively, so their returns don’t end up factoring into the model too much. Nick Marciano is a good returner on the blue line, however. He contributed very little offensively, but defensively, he was solid last year. He should be in line for a bigger role. The model is projecting very slight improvement in the defensemen.
The defensemen weren’t actually the problem with Princeton’s defense last season though; the goaltending was. Princeton allowed only 29.5 shots against per game, so they actually were slightly above average at preventing shots and chances against. The goaltending was horrendous, and honestly, if it wasn’t so bad, Princeton would have finished top 8 pretty easily and they may not have had a coaching change.
Such is life though. Goaltender is the most important position on any hockey team, and it’s really difficult to overcome if you don’t have a good one. Princeton split the net between Arthur Smith and Ethan Pearson last year. Smith was their best goaltender, but he had a poor freshman year with a 0.899 SV%. When Pearson was in, he did even worse with a 0.855, and it led Princeton to having some of the worst goaltending in the country. Their team save percentage of 0.871 was 3rd worst in the country. There is some reason for optimism though. Smith was just a freshman last year and is still very young. He was considered a talented recruit in net when he was coming in, so he does have potential. If he can improve a lot, Princeton can outplay this ranking for sure. Right now, the model predicts moderate improvement in net but not a lot.
The big wildcard for predicting Princeton defensively is the fact they have a new coach. Ben Syer comes over from Cornell and will implement his own system. Given that he’s coming from Cornell, you would think he will be using a more structured and defensive system that will allow for Princeton’s defense to improve a lot immediately.
I don’t agree with that for two reasons though. First, implementing an entirely new system takes time and practice. There’s pretty much always going to be growing pains and an adjustment to a new system, so I don’t think there will be a huge improvement in year one. The second reason is that the defensive style wasn’t really the problem as I mentioned. Princeton was actually solid at preventing shots and chances; goaltending really did them in.
Overall, Princeton is a team to watch this year under a new head coach and a team that has some talent. The model still has them bottom 4 due to the key players they lost and a below average recruiting class. I agree with it and just have them one spot lower. Year one of a new coach in a rebuild virtually never yields immediate results, and I’m expecting Princeton to struggle. Syer will definitely have them improving and more competitive in future years though, and it is not impossible that he can help them improve right away.
10. St. Lawrence (Last Year: 7)
My Ranking: 11
St. Lawrence is a team my model can never get right, and it oscillates every year. Coming out of the COVID year, the model had SLU 5th; they finished 8th. The next year, the model had them 7th, and they finished 4th. Last year, the model had them 5th and they finished 7th. So naturally, they will outperform this ranking this season.
SLU is this low because they lost a ton of players (13 to be exact, 12 of which were seniors) and lots of production. This wouldn’t be a problem with a good recruiting class to replace that production, but their recruiting class is not good and will not come close to replacing what they lost. SLU will be very reliant on role players stepping into big roles to fill the gaps.
Key Losses: F Justin Paul (19 points in 37 games), G Ben Kraws (0.919 SV%)
Key Returners: F Felikss Gavars (25 points in 39 games), D Mason Waite (20 points in 39 games), D Drake Burgin (20 points in 39 games), F Tomas Mazura (20 points in 34 games), D Philippe Chapleau (16 points in 39 games)
Key Newcomers: G Dominic Basse (St. Cloud State), F Spencer Bell (SJHL), F Nicholas Beneteau (BCHL), Jack Wieneke (NAHL)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 10
Incoming Class Rank: 10
Projected Offensive Rank: 10
SLU might only have one key offensive loss in Justin Paul, but as I said, they lost a ton of players, most of which were contributors in the middle and bottom of the lineup, even if the model doesn’t consider them key losses. The sheer numbers they lose make it significant.
It’s not as if they are devoid of talent. SLU definitely has some good players. Gavars was a threat every single night and had a great year. He’s one of their best players and the top forward on the team. Mazura has developed into a really nice top 6 center and will be back after a 20 point season. The issue is there is a very large drop off after those two. Tyler Cristall, Ty Naaykens, and Jan Lasak had 16, 14, and 13 points, respectively, which are fine numbers for 3rd line players, but all of them are going to be in the top 6. Then, there’s another drop off after Lasak to Lapointe with 8 points, and every other forward had less than 5 points last season.
The incoming class won’t be of much help either. Bell was dominant in the SJHL last season, but that’s a very weak league. The model has him as a middle 6 player not top 6 because of the weakness of that league. Outside of him, Beneteau is a good recruit who should play in the top 6 immediately. He had 63 points in the BCHL and was one of the best players in the league. Those two are good, but no other recruit projects to be an impactful player. Isaac Tremblay is the closest one, but he’s projected as a bottom 6 player.
The blue line is a similar story. Waite and Burgin had 20 points apiece last season and are very good returners. Chapleau is undersized but can really move the puck and skate well. He should be a key offensive defenseman again this season. That’s a really good trio of defenders who can contribute offensively. SLU has the same issue here though as after those 3, the next best defensemen had 5 points each. That’s another huge drop off and just contributes to the overall lack of offense.
It should be pretty clear why the model has the offense so low. There’s just not enough top end players or depth; they will need big steps forward from returning players and/or surprise freshmen impacts in order to score effectively.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 10
The lost production hurts the defensive projection for SLU too. They lose 4 defensemen from the team, and two of those were important players.
Luc Salem was a top 4 defenseman for multiple years for SLU, and he has graduated. Tucker McIntosh didn’t produce a lot offensively, but he had the best defensive numbers on the team last season and is a big loss as well. Those two will be tough to replace, and the model projects defensive decline.
The decline extends to the net after Ben Kraws signed an NHL deal in the offseason. SLU is replacing him with Dominic Basse. The model rates that as a downgrade. Basse only has one season in his 4 year career with a save percentage above 0.900. While he did play in the NCHC and is an NHL draft pick, at some point you have to perform in line with that pedigree. He should do better in the ECAC, but I can’t say I disagree with him being a downgrade from Kraws. Wieneke is an intriguing addition in net as well because he was one of the best goalies in the NAHL. He could push Basse, but I’m not expecting him to win that job out of the gate as a freshman.
It's hard to see SLU improving defensively given those losses and the replacements being downgrades on paper. Goaltending can be pretty unpredictable though, and Basse has good pedigree. If you’re a SLU fan looking for optimism, you’re hoping that Basse plays up to his NHL potential and the newcomers can fill the gaps on the blue line.
Then, with some internal development, the scoring can be enough to stay competitive. I still can’t really see SLU getting higher than 6th if everything goes right. I’m sticking by the math and my eyes which tells me that they lack talent, but I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t concerned they make this ranking look silly given the track record of always oscillating back and forth.
11. RPI (Last Year: 12)
My Ranking: 8
Last year was the first year that RPI underperformed the model’s projection and boy did they ever. They were the second biggest miss after Dartmouth since they were projected 6th. After that performance, they were going to have to make up a lot of ground in the offseason to move the needle in a mathematical model. They did make up ground but not enough to be projected higher than this.
The main reason for that is the defense after allowing 4.05 goals per game. That was one of the worst marks in the country, and it makes the baseline for the model so low that even though there’s improvement projected, it’s still projected to be a really bad defense given the starting point.
Key Losses: F Austin Heidemann (27 points in 37 games), F Ryan Brushett (21 points in 37 games)
Key Returners: F Sutter Muzzatti (25 points in 33 games), F Tyler Hotson (22 points in 37 games), F Dovar Tinling (17 points in 34 games), D Max Smolinski (13 points in 37 games)
Key Newcomers: D Arvils Bergmanis (Alaska), F Felix Caron (BCHL), D Will Gilson (Alaska-Anchorage), F Rainers Rullers (USHL), F Jordan Tonelli (Brown)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 9
Incoming Class Rank: 7
Projected Offensive Rank: 7
Heidemann and Brushett were both really good last season and are losses offensively for RPI, which hurts. But outside of those two, RPI returns practically the entire forward group, which bodes well for their ability to score this season. Then, they also bring in a recruiting class that’s solid and should be able to replace the lost production.
Muzzatti leads the way for returners with 25 points, and that was also while very clearly playing through injuries at the end of the season. He projects to be RPI’s best forward given his great first 2 seasons. Tyler Hotson also returns after a great freshman year with 22 points; he should be RPI’s best winger and will only improve as a sophomore. Dovar Tinling will be behind Muzzatti at center, and he had a good season after transferring from Vermont and spending some extra time in junior hockey.
Jake Lee and Jake Gagnon just barely missed the model’s cutoff of 0.5 points per game to be listed as key returners. However, they both missed a lot of time due to injury last season; the season prior, both were above 0.5 points per game. If they’re both healthy, they will add key secondary scoring for the Engineers.
That’s a solid group of 5 returners up front, and they’re joined by some good newcomers. Felix Caron was 3rd in the BCHL in points, and he projects as an immediate impact freshman capable of playing in the top 6. Rainers Rullers was good in the USHL with Madison last year, and he projects to contribute on the 3rd line. Jordan Tonelli transfers in from Brown after he also missed time with injuries, and he projects to be a versatile piece in the middle 6. That’s a good trio of forwards to bring in, and it gives RPI a solid top 9.
RPI made some significant upgrades on defense which should enhance their offense too. Arvils Bergmanis was one of the top defensemen in the transfer portal after he had 19 points and a +8 rating at Alaska. Will Gilson was a top offensive defensemen in the portal. He had 17 points as a freshman and 15 points as a sophomore at Alaska-Anchorage. Those two will make big offensive contributions. They join Max Smolinski who returns for his junior year after two good seasons to start his career.
Overall, RPI looks improved offensively through the portal and returning players. The key will be staying healthy as they have a number of players who are capable of good contributions but are coming off of injury filled years. If they can do that, they can surpass the projected offensive ranking here.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 12
As I mentioned before, the defense last year makes RPI start off really behind. The model doesn’t view any of the departures on defense as big losses, and it likes Smolinski, Nick Strom, and Jimmy Goffredo as returners. It projects for some defensive improvement there.
The model doesn’t rate newcomers defensive impacts (not enough junior hockey defensive data to do so), but if it did, it would presumably like Elliott McDermott who was really good defensively at UMass and is transferring to RPI for his grad year. The overhaul of players on the blue line should theoretically be good given how bad it was last year.
In net, neither Jack Watson nor Noah Giesbrecht (incoming from Ferris State) are rated well by the model. Watson has had two bad years in a row now, while Giesbrecht really struggled last season. Watson is rated slightly better, and the model expects a little improvement but not much.
RPI’s overall defensive projection is 3.62 goals against per game, which is poor enough to bring the overall ranking down to 11. That’s why I have RPI in 8th; I just don’t foresee the defense being that poor again and the teams from 8-11 are super tight in the model. For example, if the defensive projection was just 0.3 better at 3.32, that would still be very bad and last in conference. That minimal difference would move RPI into 8th for the model though. My opinion is they will improve defensively at least that much given all the good personnel changes, and their offense is the best of any team in this range. I think 8 is a fair placement.
Overall, RPI has reasons for optimism, but it will all come down to the defense. They will need it to be better to get back into the top 8, and it will need to be much better if they want to get back into the top 6 in the league. Then, they will need to stay healthy up front to get the offense they need.
12. Yale (Last Year: 10)
My Ranking: 12
Yale has consistently been struggling offensively the past few years, and this has led to them being towards the bottom of the league each year. Their recruiting has been poor, and when they’ve been competitive, it’s been because of good goaltending and gritty defense.
This year’s team will have the same type of identity. Once again, there’s limited talent and offensive ability on Yale, and it’ll really hamper them. However, the defense and goaltending appears to be pretty solid, and it can keep them competitive in most games.
Key Losses: F Ian Carpentier (14 points in 26 games), D Ryan Conroy (13 points in 30 games)
Key Returners: F David Chen (18 points in 30 games), F Briggs Gammill (15 points in 28 games), D Dylan Herzog (5 points in 28 games), G Jack Stark (0.919 SV%)
Key Newcomers: D Joseph Blackley (BCHL), D Hughie Hooker (AJHL), F Zachary Wagnon (BCHL)
Offense
Returning Offense Rank: 12
Incoming Class Rank: 12
Projected Offensive Rank: 12
Yale returns the least amount of scoring and has the worst recruiting class in the conference, so it’s no surprise to see the offense so low. Its offensive projection isn’t even close to Brown’s in 11th because there’s just so little scoring.
Ian Carpentier graduated after having 14 points, which was 3rd on the team. Besides him, Niklas Allain had 12 points and has graduated as well.
David Chen and Briggs Gammill return up front after having 18 and 15 points, respectively. They’ll lead the attack for Yale once again, and Yale will need them to take steps forward into the 20 point range to be competitive. David Andreychuk had a solid freshman year with 12 points and has potential. Will Dineen had 9 points in 20 games, and if he is healthy, he can be a good top 6 center. The next highest returning forward had 6 points though, which gives you an idea why they return by far the least scoring.
Zachary Wagnon has the highest projection among newcomers as a bottom 6 forward after a solid year with Surrey in the BCHL. I think the model is underrating Micah Berger though. He has had above a point per game for two straight years in the BCHL. His projection is lower because he struggled in the USHL this year, which is where he spent the majority of his time. At Yale, he should have plenty of opportunity, and while the USHL struggles are concerning, his time in the BCHL shows he has plenty of upside.
Yale loses its top defenseman in Ryan Conroy, which is a big loss. They do return a good player in Rhys Bentham after he had 9 points in 26 games as a freshman. That’s it for offensive contributors returning on the blue line.
Yale does have a couple incoming freshmen that I like who should be able to make offensive impacts on the backend. Joseph Blackley had a good year in the BCHL, and his age and experience will allow him to play in the ECAC immediately. Hughie Hooker is very undersized at only 5’7, but his offensive abilities will allow him to fit in on the power play and a sheltered defensive role.
There’s not too much to write home about Yale offensively, and it’s going to make it extremely difficult for them to be competitive in the ECAC this year.
Defense
Projected Defensive Rank: 5
Like last year, the defense will be where it wins its games. Yale is actually projected to be pretty solid defensively. The offensive projection is just so low that they’re still projected for 12th.
Yale will miss Ryan Conroy as he was very good both ways. Dylan Herzog returns as Yale’s best defensive defenseman, and he will be a key player in the top 4.
The main reason Yale is projected to be better than last year defensively, and why it is rated so highly, is due to the goaltending. Yale has the best goaltending room in the league with both Jack Stark and Luke Pearson. Stark returns after a stellar freshman year where he had a 0.919 SV%. He is small but very athletic, and he competes really hard. Luke Pearson missed all of last season with an injury, but he had a 0.917 across his first two seasons. Both of them would start for most teams in the league, and Yale has both. I’m not sure who will win that job, but Yale will be in good hands either way.
The defense and goaltending gives Yale a chance. If the offense can find some scoring, there is a scenario where Yale outplays this ranking. I’m just really skeptical of that as I really don’t see enough talent on the team to do that.
Final Model Rankings
Quinnipiac
Cornell
Clarkson
Dartmouth
Colgate
Harvard
Union
Brown
Princeton
St. Lawrence
RPI
Yale
Model Tiers
Quinnipiac
————————-
Cornell
Clarkson
Dartmouth
————————-
Colgate
Harvard
Union
————————- (small gap)
Brown
Princeton
St. Lawrence
RPI
Yale
My Rankings
Cornell
Quinnipiac
Dartmouth
Harvard
Colgate
Clarkson
Union
RPI
Brown
Princeton
St. Lawrence
Yale
All-League Predictions
1st Team
So F Mason Marcellus, Quinnipiac
Jr F Luke Haymes, Dartmouth
Jr F Dalton Bancroft, Cornell
Jr D John Prokop, Union
Jr D Ryan Healey, Harvard
Sr G Ian Shane, Cornell
2nd Team
Sr F Ayrton Martino, Clarkson
So F Jonathan Castagna, Cornell
Jr F Joe Miller, Harvard
So D Ben Robertson, Cornell
Sr D Tommy Bergsland, Colgate
So G Matej Marinov, Quinnipiac
3rd Team
Jr F Jeremy Wilmer, Quinnipiac
Sr F Alex DiPaolo, Colgate
Jr F Sutter Muzzatti, RPI
Sr D Davis Pennington, Quinnipiac
So D CJ Foley, Dartmouth
Jr G Aku Koskenvuo, Harvard
All-Rookie Team
F Mick Thompson, Harvard
F Brian Nicholas, Brown
F Charlie Major, Cornell
D Lucas St. Louis, Harvard
D Tate Taylor, Clarkson
G Jack Wieneke, St. Lawrence
Note: I don’t project any freshmen to win goaltender battles and be the starter for their team, so I selected the player I think is most likely to win a goaltending battle as a freshman.
Awards
Player of the Year: Jr F Luke Haymes, Dartmough
Goalie of the Year: Sr G Ian Shane, Cornell
Rookie of the Year: Fr F Charlie Major, Cornell
If you’ve made it all the way to the end of this preview, thanks for reading! Hockey season is coming up this week starting Friday, and I’m excited for it to get going!
Great job. Terrific insight as always. Thanks.