ELynah Forum

Now that we're halfway through the regular season, I thought it would be a fun exercise to see which Cornell freshman has had the greatest impact. Seems safe to say this is perhaps the best freshman class top to bottom in recent memory, so plenty of good candidates to choose from.

Fuck. It deleted my typing the first time. Okay. Back at it.

My vote's Cournoyer. Y'all know my thoughts on the goalie situation. Courns has stabilized the net significantly and can steal games for the team. Yes, he's had a bad game or two. So does every goalie. Overall, he's been remarkably good and as a freshman to boot. And remember, about a year ago, this guy was playing in the sub-QMJHL league. Insane that he's able to make two big jumps like that and stick the landing so well.

Veilleux is second, to me. He's stabilized PP1 and arguably made it click, providing a fourth scoring threat when he activates into the play. Eats 23+ minutes a game. As a freshman.

As for the forwards. I like to joke that the freshmen seem to share a single braincell, at least when it comes to scoring. DiGiulian had a great stretch, then Ryan, then Hiscock, then Long. But overall, Ryan takes the lead to me. Did you know he's actually over a point per game right now? Dude's been sneakily good, even at the stuff that doesn't appear on the scoresheet, even when he's on the third (DiGiulian) line. I don't think I remember him ever making a mistake - at least, not one that led to anything. Probably Long second, he's been good and has finally found the scoring touch, plus is clearly trusted on Castagna's wing long-term. Then, well, it's not delivery. It's DiGiulian, because of that third-line anchoring and helping to make that line one that poses a consistent scoring threat. Seriously, he's a damn fine playmaker. And that means Hiscock in the rear ( ;) ) - he's given some great goals, including at MSG, and plays like a strong power forward that can get the puck in if needed. That being said, I don't remember if he's played in the top six this year (unlike the other three - DiGiulian I think got reps in next to Walsh at the beginning of the year) - would be interested in seeing Hiscock on maybe Walsh's wing, put him in the Devlin spot and see what happens. Or, y'know, bring back Snowball's "Certified Boy-Meat" line and put him and Catalano and Wallace on the ice to plaster anyone that gets in the way.

You know you're doing okay when you can rank guys like Hiscock and Long as your fifth and sixth best freshmen.

Which made me ask the question, how much are freshmen contributing compared to the team as a whole?

The answer:

	Freshmen	Team	Freshmen %
Players	11	26	42%
Goals	26	55	47%
Assists	33	96	34%
Points	59	151	39%
PPG	7	15	47%
GWG	4	11	36%
PIM	40	122	33%
Shots	138	436	32%

Now you could say that they are underrepresented in PIM because they are getting less time on the ice (which would make their goal contribution more impressive). How do they ranking in TOI/G?

Everyone who has at least 10 min/game has played 15 games except for Major. The only freshman in the top third of the list is Veilleux.

The standout? Caton Ryan. He's been almost as productive as our leading point man Ryan Walsh, yet he's only had two-thirds of the ice time. Ryan, Walsh, and Castagna make up a third of the team's points.

Note to Casey: recruit more Ryans.

Name, Yr	TOI/G	Pts.
Xavier Veilleux, D, Fr	23:39	12
Hoyt Stanley, D, Jr	22:15	8
George Fegaras, D, Jr	20:26	9
Ryan Walsh, F, Jr	20:09	18
Luke Ashton, D, So	19:28	5
Jonathan Castagna, F, Jr	18:44	17
Charlie Major, F, So	17:13	13
Jake Kraft, F, Jr	16:27	4
Aiden Long, F, Fr	16:21	9
Michael Fisher, D, So	16:16	4
Luke Devlin, F, Jr	14:39	4
Jack O'Brien, D, Sr	14:08	5
Caton Ryan, F, Fr	13:18	16
Gio DiGiulian, F, Fr	13:05	8
Tyler Catalano, F, Jr	11:27	2
Nick DeSantis, F, Sr	11:16	3
Reegan Hiscock, F, Fr	10:41	5
Luke McCrady, D, Fr	9:10	0
Hudson Gorski, D, Fr	8:52	0
Chase Pirtle, F, Fr	8:43	7
Winter Wallace, F, Sr	8:41	0
Nicholas Wolfenberg, D, So	7:29	0
Connor Arseneault, F, Fr	6:28	2
Donovan Hamilton, D, Fr	2:30	0

Would love it to be Corns, but he's going to be a monster next season. Hard to decide if it's Hiscock or Veillieux, the latter having a huge 2 weeks but the former IMO being a solid presence every time he's on the ice. 

Excellent thread. I love seeing this breakdown. I know what I feel like I'm seeing, but it's great to confirm with the stats.

It's hard to have the goalie in the poll, because whoever it is will obviously be an impact player if they're playing well. I voted for Veilleux, as he always seems to be in on the play and active on special teams. Just loads of ice time. The assist on Friday was just super.

Veilleux, ahead of Cournoyer and Ryan.

So far the delta between Cournoyer and Keopple isn't that clear, as evidenced by the fact the coaches have been platooning them lately.

Veilleux gives the team an offensive defenseman it sorely needs and a legit PP threat.

Also, if we're counting negative impact, Veilleux has had some really tough turnovers that led to opposing goals. I know that's not what this thread is getting at, but just saying. This is not to besmirch Veilleux who is a great player overall and one of the team MVPs.

Among the forwards, Ryan is contributing the most in relatively little ice time. But I feel like in terms of value above replacement, Veilleux is maybe the most valuable player on the entire team.

In terms of value above replacement, as per CHN, the player contributing the most CHIP (so VAR, basically) on the ENTIRE TEAM is Cournoyer. (https://www.collegehockeynews.com/stats/team/Cornell/18/overall,20252026) Castagna in a close second. Walsh third, then Veilleux, Major, Ryan. You can look at the rest.

In fact, my ranking of the freshmen accurately mirrors their CHIP - and that's before I checked it. What can I say? I know puck.

Also - Courns's CHIP is at 34.4, which, again, leads the team. Fun fact, on the Hobey tracker, Cournoyer is about three tenths of a point behind Gavin fucking McKenna.

Keopple's CHIP, on the other hand, is 2.8... Nestled between the mighty contributors of DeSantis and Catalano.

Again, as I said in another thread yesterday: Keopple will not win you games. He is a solid backup who you can start from time to time if you need to. Cournoyer can win you games. This is why he is our starter. Even though Casey seems to want to give Keopple reps every time Cournoyer lets in 3 or more, Courns is still the starter. (This weekend excluded, as Cournoyer was injured Friday night, which is why Keopple went Saturday.)

Quote from: stereax on January 11, 2026, 09:30:44 PMCournoyer can win you games. This is why he is our starter. Even though Casey seems to want to give Keopple reps every time Cournoyer lets in 3 or more, Courns is still the starter. (This weekend excluded, as Cournoyer was injured Friday night, which is why Keopple went Saturday.)

Actually Casey had said before the weekend that he was likely to platoon the goalies, as he had the weekend before.

The page about CHIP is vague and doesn't say much at all about goalies:
https://www.collegehockeynews.com/news/amp/2024/11/25_Understanding-CHIP-College.php

Based on what I can gather, CHIP is meant to measure player contributions to a team, NOT player value. So yes, Cournoyer has contributed much more than the backup who has played 1/3 as many games. But that doesn't mean he's much more valuable than the Keopple. I mean, he might be, but I think the delta between Veilleux and whoever would slot into his lineup spot is greater, plus Veilleux plays a very important role.

Quote from: andyw2100 on January 11, 2026, 09:52:42 PM

Quote from: stereax on January 11, 2026, 09:30:44 PMCournoyer can win you games. This is why he is our starter. Even though Casey seems to want to give Keopple reps every time Cournoyer lets in 3 or more, Courns is still the starter. (This weekend excluded, as Cournoyer was injured Friday night, which is why Keopple went Saturday.)

Actually Casey had said before the weekend that he was likely to platoon the goalies, as he had the weekend before.

I don't see a world where you win 7-1 and switch out the goalie, barring the funky ankle situation. It still does hold that after every game where Cournoyer has given up 3+, Keopple starts the next.

Not saying Casey didn't say that, or it wasn't his plan coming into the weekend, but...

Quote from: stereax on January 11, 2026, 10:02:11 PM

Quote from: andyw2100 on January 11, 2026, 09:52:42 PM

Quote from: stereax on January 11, 2026, 09:30:44 PMCournoyer can win you games. This is why he is our starter. Even though Casey seems to want to give Keopple reps every time Cournoyer lets in 3 or more, Courns is still the starter. (This weekend excluded, as Cournoyer was injured Friday night, which is why Keopple went Saturday.)

Actually Casey had said before the weekend that he was likely to platoon the goalies, as he had the weekend before.

I don't see a world where you win 7-1 and switch out the goalie, barring the funky ankle situation. It still does hold that after every game where Cournoyer has given up 3+, Keopple starts the next.

Not saying Casey didn't say that, or it wasn't his plan coming into the weekend, but...

Leaving aside the injury issue, and assuming Casey had not decided 100% to start Keopple, the margin of victory you mention also could have been an issue that weighed in Keopple's favor. Casey may have figured that Cornell didn't "need" Cournoyer for Saturday night, and wanted to both rest Cournoyer and keep Keopple's confidence up for the coming games.

I could be completely wrong, but I almost feel like if Cournoyer had had a strong game, but we lost 1-0 or 2-1 or something, that he might have been more likely to play him again because in that case we would have really needed the win, and that barring something like that, he was just going to start Keopple.

Quote from: andyw2100 on January 11, 2026, 10:22:33 PM

Quote from: stereax on January 11, 2026, 10:02:11 PM

Quote from: andyw2100 on January 11, 2026, 09:52:42 PM

Quote from: stereax on January 11, 2026, 09:30:44 PMCournoyer can win you games. This is why he is our starter. Even though Casey seems to want to give Keopple reps every time Cournoyer lets in 3 or more, Courns is still the starter. (This weekend excluded, as Cournoyer was injured Friday night, which is why Keopple went Saturday.)

Actually Casey had said before the weekend that he was likely to platoon the goalies, as he had the weekend before.

I don't see a world where you win 7-1 and switch out the goalie, barring the funky ankle situation. It still does hold that after every game where Cournoyer has given up 3+, Keopple starts the next.

Not saying Casey didn't say that, or it wasn't his plan coming into the weekend, but...

Leaving aside the injury issue, and assuming Casey had not decided 100% to start Keopple, the margin of victory you mention also could have been an issue that weighed in Keopple's favor. Casey may have figured that Cornell didn't "need" Cournoyer for Saturday night, and wanted to both rest Cournoyer and keep Keopple's confidence up for the coming games.

I could be completely wrong, but I almost feel like if Cournoyer had had a strong game, but we lost 1-0 or 2-1 or something, that he might have been more likely to play him again because in that case we would have really needed the win, and that barring something like that, he was just going to start Keopple.

Hmm. Yeah, that's definitely a good point, and one I overlooked - that a solid drubbing like that would mean you might not "need" Cournoyer in for game 2 and can get Keopple a rep. Plus, at that point, we were 3-0 over the intersession games, too, so game 4 wasn't as important. (Versus if you're, like, 2-1 and really don't want to end up at 2-2.)

I was going to comment in at least a little bit of detail, but I thought "Hiscock's impact" and then my head exploded, so I simply voted and moved on.

Quote from: Beeeej on January 12, 2026, 04:18:00 PMI was going to comment in at least a little bit of detail, but I thought "Hiscock's impact" and then my head exploded, so I simply voted and moved on.

The jokes never get old.

Veilleux, particularly for single handedly bringing our pp back from the dead.

PP%:

1. 35.1 Minnesota-Duluth
2. 31.4 Michigan
3. 31.3 North Dakota
4. 30.7 Wisconsin
5. 29.5 St. Cloud
6. 29.4 Cornell

XV needs to be a little better on his primary responsibility so I'm going to suggest Gio and Hiscock, who I've been told are inseparable off the ice.

What an embarrassment of riches this freshman class has been.

For me, it's Cournoyer, Vielleux, and Ryan — the same group I flagged early in the season. As others have mentioned, a lot of this is position dependent, with goalie being the most valuable spot, and Vielleux's impact on the power play being huge. That said, Ryan just keeps trending upward. We saw that absolute bomb of a shot on PP2 this weekend, and it feels like his confidence is growing by the game.

And yes, I'd love to see a certified boy meat-line out there mushing Quinnipiac and Harvard. In the pre-Covid era, the Malott–Bauld–Betts checking line, or the Mullin variation, was famously effective. That kind of line can have real impact.

Let's all just say thank you to Casey and Schafer for recruiting a stellar freshman class such that we're debating the most valuable one this eagerly, lol.

The prospect of the two French-Canadians fighting for top spot is very funny to me as well, given they seem to be very close friends irl.

Quote from: stereax on January 12, 2026, 09:04:03 PMLet's all just say thank you to Casey and Schafer for recruiting a stellar freshman class such that we're debating the most valuable one this eagerly, lol.

The prospect of the two French-Canadians fighting for top spot is very funny to me as well, given they seem to be very close friends irl.

It's definitely a high bar (in many ways) to match! The height, weight and talent of the frosh is top notch!

Quote from: scoop85 on January 11, 2026, 03:03:31 PMSeems safe to say this is perhaps the best freshman class top to bottom in recent memory

The class of 2021 was the best

Quote from: scoop85 on January 11, 2026, 03:03:31 PMSeems safe to say this is perhaps the best freshman class top to bottom in recent memory, so plenty of good candidates to choose from.

Depending what recent (http://www.tbrw.info/reports/pdf/rpt_Scoring_First_Season.pdf) is:

'22 had 5 guys with > 40 points (Psencika, Penney, Rego, O'Leary, Mack) + Shane + Kempf and Suda on D.
'20 had 5 (Berard, Malinski, Mitchell, Stienburg, Malone) + Dirven and the Tupkers.
'18 had 5 (Barron, Locke, Donaldson, Mullin, Betts) + Galajda + Haiskenen
'12 had 5 guys > 60! points (Ryan, Lowry, McCarron, Ferlin, Bardreau) + MacDonald and Dias.  4 of them made the N.

By pure points scored in career:

396 '03
392 '12
376 '22 (Shane)
367 '18 (Galajda)
360 '07 (Scrivens)
332 '08
313 '16
316 '20

Farther back:

872 '65
842 '76
655 '68
614 '74
582 '78
544 '83
518 '00


The class qualification here is "first year," so for example it includes transfers' first seasons and the recruiting classes are off by a calendar year before Freshman were permitted to play varsity.

Quoting stereax' 59 first season points in the first 15 games, and projecting a 4-year career when we are decent at 140 games (remember we should get one extra RS in the next 3 seasons), this group projects out to 551 points!

Quote from: Trotsky on January 13, 2026, 10:44:16 AM

Quote from: scoop85 on January 11, 2026, 03:03:31 PMSeems safe to say this is perhaps the best freshman class top to bottom in recent memory, so plenty of good candidates to choose from.

Depending what recent (http://www.tbrw.info/reports/pdf/rpt_Scoring_First_Season.pdf) is:

'22 had 5 guys with > 40 points (Psencika, Penney, Rego, O'Leary, Mack) + Shane + Kempf and Suda on D.
'20 had 5 (Berard, Malinski, Mitchell, Stienburg, Malone) + Dirven and the Tupkers.
'18 had 5 (Barron, Locke, Donaldson, Mullin, Betts) + Galajda + Haiskenen
'12 had 5 guys > 60! points (Ryan, Lowry, McCarron, Ferlin, Bardreau) + MacDonald and Dias.  4 of them made the N.

By pure points scored in career:

396 '03
392 '12
376 '22 (Shane)
367 '18 (Galajda)
360 '07 (Scrivens)
332 '08
313 '16
316 '20

Farther back:

872 '65
842 '76
655 '68
614 '74
582 '78
544 '83
518 '00


The class qualification here is "first year," so for example it includes transfers' first seasons and the recruiting classes are off by a calendar year before Freshman were permitted to play varsity.

Quoting stereax' 59 first season points in the first 15 games, and projecting a 4-year career when we are decent at 140 games (remember we should get one extra RS in the next 3 seasons), this group projects out to 551 points!

'18 didn't get a senior season, so you can't look at the stats. In their three seasons, '18 achieved two 1-seeds and a 3-seed in the NCAA tournament. Destined for a frozen four in 2020. Had one of our all-time great goaltenders and a Hobey finalist in Barron, along with incredible scoring and depth. I need not go on. But in my eyes they were easily the best class in recent history.

Quote from: BearLover on January 13, 2026, 11:14:17 AM

Quote from: Trotsky on January 13, 2026, 10:44:16 AM

Quote from: scoop85 on January 11, 2026, 03:03:31 PMSeems safe to say this is perhaps the best freshman class top to bottom in recent memory, so plenty of good candidates to choose from.

Depending what recent (http://www.tbrw.info/reports/pdf/rpt_Scoring_First_Season.pdf) is:

'22 had 5 guys with > 40 points (Psencika, Penney, Rego, O'Leary, Mack) + Shane + Kempf and Suda on D.
'20 had 5 (Berard, Malinski, Mitchell, Stienburg, Malone) + Dirven and the Tupkers.
'18 had 5 (Barron, Locke, Donaldson, Mullin, Betts) + Galajda + Haiskenen
'12 had 5 guys > 60! points (Ryan, Lowry, McCarron, Ferlin, Bardreau) + MacDonald and Dias.  4 of them made the N.

By pure points scored in career:

396 '03
392 '12
376 '22 (Shane)
367 '18 (Galajda)
360 '07 (Scrivens)
332 '08
313 '16
316 '20

Farther back:

872 '65
842 '76
655 '68
614 '74
582 '78
544 '83
518 '00


The class qualification here is "first year," so for example it includes transfers' first seasons and the recruiting classes are off by a calendar year before Freshman were permitted to play varsity.

Quoting stereax' 59 first season points in the first 15 games, and projecting a 4-year career when we are decent at 140 games (remember we should get one extra RS in the next 3 seasons), this group projects out to 551 points!

'18 didn't get a senior season, so you can't look at the stats. In their three seasons, '18 achieved two 1-seeds and a 3-seed in the NCAA tournament. Destined for a frozen four in 2020. Had one of our all-time great goaltenders and a Hobey finalist in Barron, along with incredible scoring and depth. I need not go on. But in my eyes they were easily the best class in recent history.

367/3 = 122 pts per season. Extrapolating and assuming a 1.3 multiplier for senior year, so 156 pts, that group would have gotten 525 pts.

551 is crazy work though, and this being projected off half a rookie season at current pace. Plus, fold in guys like Gorski, Hamilton, etc who haven't gotten (much) playing time this year.

Quote from: stereax on January 13, 2026, 12:31:35 PM

Quote from: BearLover on January 13, 2026, 11:14:17 AM

Quote from: Trotsky on January 13, 2026, 10:44:16 AM

Quote from: scoop85 on January 11, 2026, 03:03:31 PMSeems safe to say this is perhaps the best freshman class top to bottom in recent memory, so plenty of good candidates to choose from.

Depending what recent (http://www.tbrw.info/reports/pdf/rpt_Scoring_First_Season.pdf) is:

'22 had 5 guys with > 40 points (Psencika, Penney, Rego, O'Leary, Mack) + Shane + Kempf and Suda on D.
'20 had 5 (Berard, Malinski, Mitchell, Stienburg, Malone) + Dirven and the Tupkers.
'18 had 5 (Barron, Locke, Donaldson, Mullin, Betts) + Galajda + Haiskenen
'12 had 5 guys > 60! points (Ryan, Lowry, McCarron, Ferlin, Bardreau) + MacDonald and Dias.  4 of them made the N.

By pure points scored in career:

396 '03
392 '12
376 '22 (Shane)
367 '18 (Galajda)
360 '07 (Scrivens)
332 '08
313 '16
316 '20

Farther back:

872 '65
842 '76
655 '68
614 '74
582 '78
544 '83
518 '00


The class qualification here is "first year," so for example it includes transfers' first seasons and the recruiting classes are off by a calendar year before Freshman were permitted to play varsity.

Quoting stereax' 59 first season points in the first 15 games, and projecting a 4-year career when we are decent at 140 games (remember we should get one extra RS in the next 3 seasons), this group projects out to 551 points!

'18 didn't get a senior season, so you can't look at the stats. In their three seasons, '18 achieved two 1-seeds and a 3-seed in the NCAA tournament. Destined for a frozen four in 2020. Had one of our all-time great goaltenders and a Hobey finalist in Barron, along with incredible scoring and depth. I need not go on. But in my eyes they were easily the best class in recent history.

367/3 = 122 pts per season. Extrapolating and assuming a 1.3 multiplier for senior year, so 156 pts, that group would have gotten 525 pts.

551 is crazy work though, and this being projected off half a rookie season at current pace. Plus, fold in guys like Gorski, Hamilton, etc who haven't gotten (much) playing time this year.

Notably their junior season also got cut short before the ECAC tournament, so likely at least five additional games (2-3 ECAC quarterfinal games, semis, final, and then the NCAA tournament).

Quote from: BearLover on January 13, 2026, 12:33:37 PM

Quote from: stereax on January 13, 2026, 12:31:35 PM

Quote from: BearLover on January 13, 2026, 11:14:17 AM

Quote from: Trotsky on January 13, 2026, 10:44:16 AM

Quote from: scoop85 on January 11, 2026, 03:03:31 PMSeems safe to say this is perhaps the best freshman class top to bottom in recent memory, so plenty of good candidates to choose from.

Depending what recent (http://www.tbrw.info/reports/pdf/rpt_Scoring_First_Season.pdf) is:

'22 had 5 guys with > 40 points (Psencika, Penney, Rego, O'Leary, Mack) + Shane + Kempf and Suda on D.
'20 had 5 (Berard, Malinski, Mitchell, Stienburg, Malone) + Dirven and the Tupkers.
'18 had 5 (Barron, Locke, Donaldson, Mullin, Betts) + Galajda + Haiskenen
'12 had 5 guys > 60! points (Ryan, Lowry, McCarron, Ferlin, Bardreau) + MacDonald and Dias.  4 of them made the N.

By pure points scored in career:

396 '03
392 '12
376 '22 (Shane)
367 '18 (Galajda)
360 '07 (Scrivens)
332 '08
313 '16
316 '20

Farther back:

872 '65
842 '76
655 '68
614 '74
582 '78
544 '83
518 '00


The class qualification here is "first year," so for example it includes transfers' first seasons and the recruiting classes are off by a calendar year before Freshman were permitted to play varsity.

Quoting stereax' 59 first season points in the first 15 games, and projecting a 4-year career when we are decent at 140 games (remember we should get one extra RS in the next 3 seasons), this group projects out to 551 points!

'18 didn't get a senior season, so you can't look at the stats. In their three seasons, '18 achieved two 1-seeds and a 3-seed in the NCAA tournament. Destined for a frozen four in 2020. Had one of our all-time great goaltenders and a Hobey finalist in Barron, along with incredible scoring and depth. I need not go on. But in my eyes they were easily the best class in recent history.

367/3 = 122 pts per season. Extrapolating and assuming a 1.3 multiplier for senior year, so 156 pts, that group would have gotten 525 pts.

551 is crazy work though, and this being projected off half a rookie season at current pace. Plus, fold in guys like Gorski, Hamilton, etc who haven't gotten (much) playing time this year.

Notably their junior season also got cut short before the ECAC tournament, so likely at least five additional games (2-3 ECAC quarterfinal games, semis, final, and then the NCAA tournament).

Not only do you have to consider seasons that were cut short, you also have to consider classes that got extra playing time. The advantage the current freshmen have is that they are 10 of 24 skaters on the team. That means they are getting to play a lot, and not just on the fourth line. They are also playing under a coach that is putting more emphasis on offense. It makes sense that we'd see more goal production from them.

Cournoyer is on the Mike Richter watchlist! (https://x.com/CornellMHockey/status/2011563209699049905?t=PL8v18OXqvBDK9obPFOIng&s=19)

Notably absent from the watchlist: Remington Keopple.

Pretty interesting list overall, though. Both Dartmouth goalies are on it.

We oughta show some love to Ashton and Fisher too. Not freshmen but are newcomers that are big pieces for us.

Ashton hasnt had the offense I thought he would bring but he has been better defensively than I thought he would be, and plays more physical than I figured due to his size and low penalty minutes.

I don't think Fisher has been mentioned more than 10 times on this forum and I hardly notice him on the ice, which is actually quite the compliment for a third pair defensive defenseman. Not sure how he was ever a third round pick  but looks like he can be a solid defenseman for us for the next three years.

When I created the poll I figured Cornouyer would receive the most votes and Veillieux would be the runner-up, but I thought the gap would be larger. And, I thought Long and especially Ryan might get a bit more love than 1 vote apiece.

I'll plan to do a similar poll at the end of the season (hopefully not until after we claim the big prize in Vegas!).

Quote from: scoop85 on January 15, 2026, 05:08:06 PMWhen I created the poll I figured Cornouyer would receive the most votes and Veillieux would be the runner-up, but I thought the gap would be larger. And, I thought Long and especially Ryan might get a bit more love than 1 vote apiece.

Long has been effective lately, he could wind up being the most impactful across the entire career.

Ryan is underestimated for his contributions so far.

Quote from: Trotsky on January 15, 2026, 07:09:26 PM

Quote from: scoop85 on January 15, 2026, 05:08:06 PMWhen I created the poll I figured Cornouyer would receive the most votes and Veillieux would be the runner-up, but I thought the gap would be larger. And, I thought Long and especially Ryan might get a bit more love than 1 vote apiece.

Long has been effective lately, he could wind up being the most impactful across the entire career.

Ryan is underestimated for his contributions so far.

I'm surprised DiGiulian doesn't have at least one vote considering his early scoring streak.  I guess it's "what have you done for me lately?"

Quote from: Jeff Hopkins '82 on January 15, 2026, 08:58:17 PM

Quote from: Trotsky on January 15, 2026, 07:09:26 PM

Quote from: scoop85 on January 15, 2026, 05:08:06 PMWhen I created the poll I figured Cornouyer would receive the most votes and Veillieux would be the runner-up, but I thought the gap would be larger. And, I thought Long and especially Ryan might get a bit more love than 1 vote apiece.

Long has been effective lately, he could wind up being the most impactful across the entire career.

Ryan is underestimated for his contributions so far.

I'm surprised DiGiulian doesn't have at least one vote considering his early scoring streak.  I guess it's "what have you done for me lately?"

No same. But I think Cournoyer and Veilleux playing positions with fewer players, plus their being trusted as #1 guys, makes them pull away.

DiGiulian would be the pride of many recruiting classes.  He isn't even top 4 in this one.

That's how strong this cohort is.

Quote from: Trotsky on January 16, 2026, 01:17:47 AMDiGiulian would be the pride of many recruiting classes.  He isn't even top 4 in this one.

That's how strong this cohort is.

Spot on. Heck, Pirtle would've been a top 4 guy in many classes.

This is what the kids call "glazing"