Recruits 2026 and Beyond

[chimpfood]

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

Hard disagree

[BearLover]

...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.

[stereax]

...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.

We also just brought in a huge freshman class and aren't graduating a ton of seniors.

Plus, the recruiting landscape is changing drastically, and we can grab guys like that Ohio State recruit who fall out of favor with other programs, as well as CHL players with the requisite academics. I mean, we got Courns in like, April?

Point is, at this point, our recruiting list is more a SUGGESTION of future years than an iron-clad "this is how the team will look".

[BearLover]

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.

[pfibiger]

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.

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:

[BearLover]

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.

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.

[Trotsky]

He's good with people.

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

He's good with people.

"To serve man"?

[BearLover]

He'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   

[pfibiger]

He'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/

[BearLover]

He'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.

[The Rancor]

There's an inverse relationship between how much BL talks about hockey and how much he understands it.

[stereax]

NCAA>CHL>USHL>BCHL/NAHL/OJHL/etc.

In CHL: OHL>WHL>QMJHL.

The Q is described by some of my prospect-watching friends as "fake French hockey", if that tells you what regard it's held in. It also has my favorite CHL team, which tells you what regard I hold it in. Here's a recent forum post about the junior leagues that's, imo, pretty accurate.

All that being said, the CHL is a different STYLE of hockey than the USHL. More physical for sure. I'm not sure how the scoring differs, but the disparity can be massive between the haves and have-nots. The Q gets up to crazy shit. The W and O are a lot stronger, though.

The US(HL) hasn't been producing as many top picks as even a year or three ago - the NTDP is not what it once was! A lot of the top picks go to the NCAA for their draft year.

All that being said, lack of scoring in the CHL is not AS big of an issue as the USHL, imo, especially for recruits that are 17 or 18 or whatever. And the fact that you're even getting CHL guys now is big. If they're getting regular reps in the CHL, you can bet they're probably a cut above the USHL guys, and several above other leagues.

[BearLover]

There's an inverse relationship between how much BL talks about hockey and how much he understands it.

That doesn't even make sense

[chimpfood]

If I was the one choosing I would send all of our best recruits to the USHL. It's older, plays the college hockey Friday/Saturday game schedule, and seems more similar to ECAC style hockey (structured and defensive).

The CHL schedule makes it harder for guys to get stronger during the season and the leagues overall are less focused on development and future success than the USHL is.