ELynah Forum

I appreciate Casey's candor in interviews. His answers go into greater strategic depth than typical coach-speak. I found interesting his quote in the Sun's write-up of tonight's game that he didn't think the team played very well yesterday despite the 7-1 win, referencing that Cornell's xGA (expected goals against) was the highest of any game this season. Interestingly CHN's xGA stat says Cornell's xGA was a full goal higher in the Harvard game earlier this season (3.8 vs. last night's 2.. Clearly, the coaching staff is sourcing its xGA differently. (chimpfood previously mentioned that CHN's stat only looks at where on the ice the shot came from, not the type of shot it was.) Anyway, I'm glad the staff is incorporating analytics and that Casey takes them seriously. With four full-time coaches and a Director of Hockey Ops, we have the man-power to gather and utilize this information.

Henry Major traded by Chicago to Des Moines (one USHL team to another).

Quote from: chimpfood on January 10, 2026, 10:26:59 PMGutsy win. Say what you want about Keopple but he's stepped up for the most part. We're very lucky their guy was stupid enough to head to the bench after the penalties expired and just left Castagna open for the break. Even with a skeleton band these games are much better.

We went 4-0 in home non conference games that could've sunk our NPI, not we get to benefit by playing four top 20 teams through the next two weeks. This is where we can make huge jumps on the NPI and not even risk blowing the season if all goes wrong.

Beat Quinnipiac. I hate those MFs

I agree. 9th in the NPI is nice but the margins are very thin between us and like 16th so still much to be decided.

I'm not sure how shifts for the extra skaters are determined but we've repeatedly seen the extra skater come in for a sporadic shift and look shaky, often turning it over, ending up out of position, or taking a bad penalty. Not sure if there's a good solution other than waiting until garbage time to get these players shifts but there does seem to be a tradeoff between getting extra skaters ice time and actually winning the game. I don't blame the skaters, it's really hard to enter the game cold, but it's been noticeable. I'm surprised we aren't seeing Wolfenberg or Mosko who got ice time their freshman seasons.

I like Pirtle in the lineup as an extra scoring threat. This is overly facile analysis since obviously the coaches were keeping him out for a reason (defensive liability?), but it's nice to see him in the lineup because it gets us closer to BL's patented 9F/3D scoring threat threshold.

Will students be back for next weekend's games? It was nice to hear the band.

Quote from: stereax on January 09, 2026, 01:03:58 AM

Quote from: BearLover on January 09, 2026, 01:01:41 AM

Quote from: stereax on January 09, 2026, 12:02:23 AMNCAA>CHL>USHL>BCHL/NAHL/OJHL/etc.

It's kind of nonsensical to say CHL>USHL when the CHL is comprised of three different leagues and one of those leagues is considered to be worse than the USHL.

The thread you linked to is full of posts like this one: "The Q has been a worse league than the USHL for at least five years now by just about every single metric."

Which brings me back to my original point (which I guess some people disputed for some reason): the USHL and CHL are comparable. If a recruit is producing zero points in the CHL, that is not a good sign.

And don't a bunch of our recruits come from leagues like the BCHL?

Not anymore really. Prior to CHL NCAA eligibility we would recruit heavily from the BCHL (along with many other schools), and rarely from the other leagues like the OJHL, CCHL. CHL eligibility seems to have changed things. We currently don't have any BCHL recruits outside of players cut from their CHL teams.

Quote from: stereax on January 09, 2026, 12:02:23 AMNCAA>CHL>USHL>BCHL/NAHL/OJHL/etc.

It's kind of nonsensical to say CHL>USHL when the CHL is comprised of three different leagues and one of those leagues is considered to be worse than the USHL.

The thread you linked to is full of posts like this one: "The Q has been a worse league than the USHL for at least five years now by just about every single metric."

Which brings me back to my original point (which I guess some people disputed for some reason): the USHL and CHL are comparable. If a recruit is producing zero points in the CHL, that is not a good sign.

Quote from: The Rancor on January 08, 2026, 11:05:44 PMThere's an inverse relationship between how much BL talks about hockey and how much he understands it.

That doesn't even make sense

Quote from: pfibiger on January 08, 2026, 08:36:34 PM

Quote from: BearLover on January 08, 2026, 08:32:22 PM

Quote from: Trotsky on January 08, 2026, 07:31:34 PMHe's good with people.

This is exactly the type of post that is going to de-escalate the bickering on this forum. I ask that if you post something of no substance just to egg on another poster that you at least make it funny or original! But this post is so stupid that I just don't see the point   

I made a dumb joke from Office Space. Trotsky kind of quoted the same character. Feels like pretty standard message board banter.

As for league performance -- the USHL is in a league of its own in juniors and maybe as good as the worst major junior league. This is a pretty interesting analysis of league performance:

https://hockey-graphs.com/2020/03/02/which-league-is-best/

Oh, I missed that reference tbh.

I think the problem with the above graph is that it's cut off in 2018. The general view (from what I've gleaned from podcasts and other hockey coverage) is that he USHL is a lot better now than it was in 2018, probably now better than the Q and on par with the W.

Also, the USHL is perceived as lower scoring than the CHL. Overall I think it's reasonable to treat a lack of production in the CHL as similar to the same in the USHL.

Quote from: Trotsky on January 08, 2026, 07:31:34 PMHe's good with people.

This is exactly the type of post that is going to de-escalate the bickering on this forum. I ask that if you post something of no substance just to egg on another poster that you at least make it funny or original! But this post is so stupid that I just don't see the point   

Quote from: pfibiger on January 08, 2026, 05:56:13 PM

Quote from: BearLover on January 08, 2026, 02:20:06 PMCornell currently has 17 committed players, which is a good amount. We don't typically decommit guys, so there isn't much room for more recruits. Of those 17, only Michael Dec, Cole Emerton, and Nolan Long stand out to me. There are a few young recruits who haven't started junior hockey yet, but most of our guys are in juniors and not producing much if at all.

Some of these kids may well blossom into good players, but on average this is definitely less production than I'm used to seeing.

What are you used to seeing? This year is totally unprecedented. Our list of recruits is FULL of kids who are playing their first year of major junior hockey, not juniors. That's a totally different level of hockey and a different transition. What's considered good for a first year player in the Q? It's certainly not the same PPG as a second year in the BCHL. These kids aren't first round NHL talent who are expected to come in and light up major juniors.

I spot checked half a dozen kids playing major junior committed to Quinnipiac and it seems like the spread of production is pretty similar (without anyone producing like Dec).

Don't worry, though, I bought you a present:

I didn't jump to conclusions, I was just remarking that we seem to be producing a lot less in juniors than normal. Is major junior not "juniors"? I am assuming it's approximately on the level of the USHL. I could go down the list but I think it's clear from clicking on players' stats that we have a ton of forwards in their first year of juniors who aren't producing at all, forwards in their second year of juniors who are producing at a half point per game or less, etc.

Cornell currently has 17 committed players, which is a good amount. We don't typically decommit guys, so there isn't much room for more recruits. Of those 17, only Michael Dec, Cole Emerton, and Nolan Long stand out to me. There are a few young recruits who haven't started junior hockey yet, but most of our guys are in juniors and not producing much if at all.

Some of these kids may well blossom into good players, but on average this is definitely less production than I'm used to seeing.

Quote from: chimpfood on January 08, 2026, 11:55:04 AM

Quote from: BearLover on January 08, 2026, 11:28:07 AM...has anyone else noticed that our recruiting looks weaker than usual?
*ducks*

Hard disagree

We have fewer players producing at a high clip in juniors, and more players not producing at all, than we typically do.

Also, grading on a slight scale because a flood of CHL players recently became available, meaning our recruiting should be improving.

...has anyone else noticed that our recruiting looks weaker than usual?
*ducks*

Quote from: BlueSky on January 07, 2026, 09:14:21 AMJane is such a good, thorough writer.

My take away was that if we look at the big picture, and not micro-manage each shift over every weekend, we are a very good team, in a good position, with a solid "upside" going forward. I don't see this team having a slump or meltdown....perhaps a hic up like at Clarkson, keeping us in the conversation all season. Need steady play between the pipes and we'll be ok. #LGR

I'm pleased with where we're at but I'm not sure "we're very good" and not prone to slumps is the takeaway from nearly dropping two home games to the 37th ranked team in the NPI. It's too soon to form expectations IMO. Crashing and burning is well within our range, as is a winning streak. We have questions in goal now too that we didn't have a few games ago. Cournoyer's overall body of work has been good, but he's a freshman who's had a few bad games in a row, and his replacement has his own reliability issues. Basically, I have no idea how good this team is and need to see more, but I'll certainly take 11 in the NPI at this stage of the season.

Quote from: ugarte on January 07, 2026, 11:34:38 AM

Quote from: BearLover on January 07, 2026, 10:19:35 AM

Quote from: Will on January 07, 2026, 10:15:46 AM

Quote from: BearLover on January 06, 2026, 01:17:25 PM"Then you get the right people," Jones said. "And you know, some guys you lose might be for the right reasons. They might not be the person that fits into our culture, fits into our program. And that's a big part of the long history of Cornell. As you get the right people here, you get good people, hard-working people."

Casey throwing shade at Robertson and Pelletier. Nice!

Maybe, maybe not. I think Casey is too diplomatic to say anything other than, effectively, "I got the guys that I want on the team right now."  He'd never come out and complain, "Those guys who left early for the pros or the transfer portal? Eff 'em."

I'm being tongue-in-cheek. Of course Casey is going to be diplomatic, as he should. You're never going to get more out of a coach than a quote like this one that implies the guys who left weren't "the right people, good people, hard-working people."

I don't think he's talking about Robertson, I think he's talking about recruits that weren't interested. Maybe that means Pelletier but I doubt that too. I think it's generic coachspeak.

It's generic coachspeak but it seems to refer to guys who left or didn't want to come. It directly follows this line in the article: " For what Cornell lost, it appears it gained it all back and then some — seven of the Big Red's nine goals this weekend came off the sticks of freshmen." The quote also comes after the article discusses the departure of Bancroft and Robertson and all of last year's graduating seniors. The point being, Cornell lost a lot, but they brought the right guys in, good people who want to work hard, and that's why they're having success.

Quote from: marty on January 07, 2026, 11:15:35 AM

Quote from: BearLover on January 07, 2026, 11:06:11 AM

Quote from: marty on January 07, 2026, 10:55:50 AM

Quote from: BearLover on January 07, 2026, 10:19:35 AM

Quote from: Will on January 07, 2026, 10:15:46 AM

Quote from: BearLover on January 06, 2026, 01:17:25 PM"Then you get the right people," Jones said. "And you know, some guys you lose might be for the right reasons. They might not be the person that fits into our culture, fits into our program. And that's a big part of the long history of Cornell. As you get the right people here, you get good people, hard-working people."

Casey throwing shade at Robertson and Pelletier. Nice!

Maybe, maybe not. I think Casey is too diplomatic to say anything other than, effectively, "I got the guys that I want on the team right now."  He'd never come out and complain, "Those guys who left early for the pros or the transfer portal? Eff 'em."

I'm being tongue-in-cheek. Of course Casey is going to be diplomatic, as he should. You're never going to get more out of a coach than a quote like this one that implies the guys who left weren't "the right people, good people, hard-working people."

So, again, you're always
1) Honest
2) Joking, tongue in cheek
or
3) Trolling

Got it. That's why we love your complexity.

But then there's...
4) All of the above
5) None of the above

Please find a new hobby

I love watching hockey.  I don't enjoy the methane that sometimes taints the sport.
Number 1 above in case you're wondering.

In this case the "hobby" is harassing me in response to every one of my posts