5. Princeton (5-12-0, 4-6-0 ECAC)

Due to the similarity between the academic calendars of Harvard and Princeton, the Tigers have played as much hockey as the Crimson thus far. Unfortunately for Coach Len Quesnelle, they haven’t fared quite as well. Special teams have hurt the Tigers so far, as they are currently last in the ECAC in power play efficiency and 10th in penalty killing. Princeton has only scored two goals per game in ECAC play, but that stands to improve with Brad Parsons—the Tigers’ leading returning scorer this year—back in the lineup after missing nine games this season. GRADE: C.

5. (tie) Clarkson (7-7-3, 3-0-2 ECAC)

No need to change your prescription. The Golden Knights have indeed played only five ECAC games this year in comparison to Harvard’s 11. Nevertheless, Clarkson holds the distinction of being the only team in the conference without a loss in league play. After last weekend’s home sweep of Mercyhurst, the Golden Knights find themselves back at the .500 mark for the first time since Nov. 23. Known for its regular season prowess, a surging Clarkson team that has won three of its last four figures to be a player in the ECAC race. GRADE: A-.

5. (tie) Brown (4-7-2, 3-5-2 ECAC)

The Bears sent a message with their season-opening upset of the Crimson at Bright Hockey Center, and while the win gave them instant credibility, it has also prevented them from sneaking up on any ECAC opponents the rest of the way. Even though Brown has one league win since a 5-1 drubbing of Vermont on Nov. 10, the Bears’ upset win over Wisconsin in the Badgers’ own holiday tournament showed that Coach Roger Grillo’s team still packs punch. GRADE: B-.

8. Rensselaer (7-6-2, 2-3-2 ECAC)

You want a sign that the Engineers are for real? Well, their dramatic 6-4 win over New Hampshire—now the third-ranked team in the country—should do the trick. With two of the most electrifying players in the ECAC—forwards Marc Cavosie and Matt Murley—RPI is always in a position to win. No. 7 Boston University can attest to that—it saw its 6-1 third-period lead evaporate against the Engineers before holding on for a 6-5 win. With loads of experienced players from last season’s 17-15-2 team, RPI will only get better as the season goes along. GRADE: B+.

9. Vermont (2-11-2, 2-3-1 ECAC)

It’s been a rough year for the Catamounts. Coming in with high expectations after upsetting top-seeded Clarkson in the first round of last season’s playoffs, Vermont surrendered 18 goals in its first three games and has never really recovered. The centerpiece of last season’s playoff success—goaltender Shawn Conschafter—has endured a rough season. The bottom line is that the young Catamount defense must mature in a hurry if Vermont has any hopes of repeating last season’s postseason accomplishments. GRADE: C-.

9. (tie) Union (6-6-3, 2-4-1 ECAC)

The Skating Dutchmen—led by Coach Kevin Sneddon ’92—began the year 3-1-1 before going winless over their next six games. Union has rallied, though, winning two of its last three and taking an early lead against the Crimson before falling 3-2 last weekend. The Dutchmen have done a much better job of staying out of the penalty box this season, and they have also played pretty well in their own end of the ice. With things relatively shored up on the defensive side, Union must focus its efforts in the attacking zone, where it has only mustered a scant 1.71 goals per game in league play. GRADE: C+.

11. Colgate (4-11-0, 2-4-0 ECAC)

Since I used “scant” to describe an offensive output of 1.71 goals per game, I shudder to think how I’ll describe the Raiders’ team average of 1.33. In this case, I’m not so sure that “awful” would be too harsh. What’s more, two of Colgate’s four wins have come against Iona, a mediocre team in the MAAC, a very mediocre conference. Thankfully for the Raiders, things are a little bit better on defense. However, it’s really hard to win hockey games when your leading goal-scorer after 15 games has only six tallies. GRADE: D+.

12. St. Lawrence (3-12-0, 1-4-0 ECAC)