Ranking the best players in the D-I Women's division in 2025.

May 1, 2025 by Ultiworld in Opinion

There’s no shortage of talent in the D-I college women’s division. We look a lot at team success, and often see familiar names and faces in those discussions. But who are the best individual players? Who brings the most value to winning a championship? Figuring out which stars shine the brightest is more art than science, but perhaps there’s democratic power in numbers.

So who are the best players in the division right now? To try to clear away as much of the white noise created by circumstance as possible and get to the heart of each individual’s value and contribution, we asked a diverse group of five members of our coverage team, as well as an anonymous group of elite players and coaches, to weigh in on the following prompt:

If you were starting a college team today with the singular goal of winning a theoretical D-I Championship this May, how would you rank the players within the division? You aren’t building a team of all of your selections, so don’t worry about how the players complement each other. Consider each pick the first pick of a team, drafting in order, only you can’t pick the players you’ve already ranked above. With regards to injuries an absences, we will include all rostered players unless there is confirmation a player will not be competing, or would not be able to compete, at Regionals and/or Nationals.

In order to improve how representative our rankings are of the opinions of our voters, we have iterated until arriving at this process. We each listed out our top 35 players to iron out some of the gradations on the fringes and then combined our lists to create a composite ranking. In addition, we included the ballots of a few anonymous elite players and coaches from different teams and regions. We used a weighted scoring system for votes, with Participants’ Ballots counting as roughly 25%, Subscribers’ Ballots as roughly 10%, and Staff Ballots comprising the remaining percentage.¹

We’ll start with our top 10, and discussion about that group. Then we’ll reveal the entire top 25, followed by the complete ballots, and additional conversations about the rankings.

The Top 10

Overall Rank	Player Name	Ranking Pts.	Grace Conerly	Edward Stephens	Graham Gerhart	Graham Gordon	Keith Raynor	Kiana Hu	Scott Dunham	Participant (6) Rankings	Subscriber (4) Rankings
1	Mika Kurahashi	325.6	1	2	1	1	1	1	1	3	4
2	Clil Phillips	312.4	2	8	2	2	2	3	5	2	6
3	Trout Weybright	293.1	3	13	3	3	5	7	3	4	2
4	Chagall Gelfand	286.5	15	1	18	10	10	2	2	1	1
5	Lia Schwartz	240.7	6	9	4	4	4	6	17	22	11
6	Kat McGuire	230.4	4	3	12	5	6	5	25	11	49
7	Rachel Chang	227.7	23	14	6	8	16	12	11	12	5
8	Abbi Shilts	227.5	9	5	9	13	7	14	9	14	16
9	Devin Quinn	226.2	5	10	5	6	8	15	6	31	9
10	Miko Magnant	217.7	10	4	13	9	15	4	29	9	23

[Editor: There are some sorting issues with the table that cannot be altered at the time. Our apologies for the inconvenience.]

First big question is obvious. Who was your #1? What were your personal criteria for figuring that out? How many players did you consider for the top spot?

Keith Raynor (Senior Editor): For me, the conversation for the top spot was just between two players: Mika Kurahashi (UBC) and Clil Phillips (Colorado).

I always look for dynamism, the ability to create multiple lanes of attack, and prioritize being able to handle a large offensive burden while enhancing the players around you. And then I look at body of work and how much evidence I have to support those thoughts to increase my confidence in my evaluation of a given player.

We have had many years of Kurahashi – #4 last year and #15 two years ago – and Phillips – #9 last year and #3 two years ago – turning in powerhouse performances with elite ceilings. I chose Kurahashi narrowly because of her fluidity and I think better ability in the air and in small spaces.

Grace Conerly (Staff Writer): Agree with Keith’s criteria – for my ranking, I also strongly valued defensive ability and their ability to guard any type of player.

Edward Stephens (College D-I Editor): Whatever the criteria, there was a lot of consensus. Six of our seven staff voters had her at #1, and the last one had her at #2. What is it that pushes Kurahashi over the top?

Graham Gordon (Contributing Writer): Kurahashi is so singular in my opinion, as she brings one important skill at a much higher level than anyone else – the ability to generate acres of separation in the open lane. There is no other player in the division who can get open like her, and she’s clearly the straw that stirs the drink for the best offense in the division (I’m not ready to write UBC off after one game). If we add on the fact that she’s an elite thrower, strong in the air, and versatile on D, it was an easy settlement for me. Her being on the Team Canada World Games short list and one of the best players on Vancouver Red Flag (in club) the past three years is just the cherry on top!

Stephens: Sorry, isn’t Miko Magnant (Oregon) also generating that kind of separation?

Okay, I had better toss my pitiful two cents in, seeing as I am the only person in the entire Ultiworld universe not to have Kurahashi number one (although shoutout to the participants and subscribers, who, as groups, both agreed with me). While I considered Kurahashi – as well as Kat McGuire (Michigan) and Magnant – I ultimately landed on Chagall Gelfand (Carleton). Why? Because, irrespective of my impression of her skill compared to her peers, Gelfand is the player who seems to want it the most in this particular moment, the player who appears most able to drag her team through any situation. Is it a slam-dunk having her over Kurahashi? No, not at all. But it certainly helps that, in comparison, Gelfand is the one much more likely to go out of her way to generate both scores and blocks.

Conerly: I’m definitely on board with Gelfand’s being amazing and getting it done when her team needs it most. But I don’t think she’s measurably better at it than Kurahashi. Aside from UBC having a team wide menty (or so it seemed) in one game, I’ve been very impressed with Kurahashi’s takeover ability and continually improving throwing, which is why I had her #1.

Graham Gerhart (Senior Staff Writer): I think this is a rare situation where you don’t have to overthink it when it comes to the best player this season, which is why I’m impressed Edward still did it.

Kurahashi can fit in almost any position her team needs her in and has a field IQ above almost all of her peers. UBC do share the disc (as opposed to steering it toward a particular person most of the time) but they look to their best player to win them the point in almost every big moment.

Stephens: Okay, okay, I don’t think I can push too hard against any of this, since Kurahashi was my #2 – I’ll wait to see what happens if they tangle in Burlington and eat whatever crow gets put onto my plate. Here’s what I do want to know though. Did any of you consider any other players for the #1 spot, or was it Kurahashi in a tier all on her own?

Gerhart: I briefly thought about Clil Phillips as my number one. There’s really no criticism you can levy against Clil for #1 aside from maybe the usage rate. Colorado are so disciplined with their lines so they don’t cross Clil over as often as one might expect. At the start of the season I had Trout Weybright (Oregon) penciled in as the top player in the division but I think there’s still some growth with their decision making that I’m waiting to see before I can return to that thought.

On the subject of Kurahashi, I do think that is something that sets her apart from the others in the top 5. She’s one of the safest bets with the disc in hand even if some of the others have a slightly larger range in other aspects of their game.

Chagall Gelfand and Miko Magnant both went from unranked to top 10, even jumping some older players who held higher spots – for example Caroline Stone (Vermont), Naomi Fina (Carleton), Devin Quinn (UC Santa Barbara). What led to these leaps? How do you feel about their final ranking?

Conerly: I think these rankings always have some recency bias built in – both Magnant and Gelfand have been crushing it on two of the most watched/successful teams this year. But those rises come at the expense of players who have been known quantities for years. Namely, are we really saying Tori Gray (UC San Diego) is no longer a top-10 college player???

Kiana Hu (Contributing Writer): Both players Grace mentioned as risers, Magnant and Gelfand, are the type where even after just watching one or two games they play in you immediately know that they are the engine for their teams – capable of making big plays when called upon but otherwise just really steady, solid players who are often going every other.

Here’s why I didn’t have Gray in my top-10. I think a lot of my decisions were biased on the games I did or didn’t watch this season. In some of the ones I did watch of D-Co at Stanford Invite, Tori Gray wasn’t as impressive or wasn’t the main contributor for the team – especially when compared to the impact of teammate Abbi Shilts (UC San Diego). So – yep, I guess that is sort of a recency bias. But kind of a justified one, in my opinion.

Gordon: Gelfand is also playing in a slightly different role this year – rather than catching the centering pass we’re seeing her start downfield in Syzygy’s ho-stack, with the pull play often designed for her to initiate under and huck in continuation, which has been really impactful for the offensive flow. When the play breaks down, she’s still heavily involved, sometimes every other, but the bottom line is that she is much more do-it-all in her second year.

As for Magnant, I think she’s just leveled up across the board in a big way. Her skill as a deep cutter is definitely expanded compared to last year, which definitely has led to defenders being inclined to adjust their positioning and give her the under, which gets the disc in her hands a lot to show off her throwing bag. I agree with Kiana that she’s clearly the straw that stirs the drink for Fugue, it’s obvious after watching them play for a couple points.

Stephens: Miko Magnant is without a doubt the player who has risen the most for me personally this season. I love a bold player, I love a player who never backs down from a challenge, I love a player who can inspire me. Does that mean she’s actually the #4 player in the game right now? Well, that’s a sketchy proposition. But I choose to trust my heart on this one and hitch my wagon to the 2025’s best downfield player. I considered her at #1.

Raynor: Magnant’s rise this year feels a lot like Naomi Fina’s last year. That isn’t to say it is wholly unjustified, but I remember Fina getting some POTY hype during the regular season. Both Edward and Scott Dunham had her top 10, and she was number 14 overall. Edward said he considered her “as high as number 3 overall.” And I worry if there’s a bit of a breakout bonus effect. These are such exciting players who are having this elite impact and maybe that overexcitement leads to favoring the new flavors over the more familiar ones.

Several players who made the overall top 10 earned a few votes of dissent, placing way below that mark on an individual ballot or two. Trout Weybright was down at #13 for Edward , Chagall Gelfand  fell to #18 for Graham Gerhart, Scott was lower than the group on both Lia Schwartz (#5) and Kat McGuire (#6) — ranking them at 17 & 25, respectively; Grace dropped Rachel Chang (#7) to 23rd on her ballot, and Kiana had Devin Quinn (#9) down at 15. So — tell us what’s going on? What more do you need to see from these players that you aren’t seeing? And which one of these is the weirdest low ranking in the opinions of everyone else?

Conerly: That’s my bad on Rachel Chang – sorry folks. When I was compiling the list, I think I had them here because of defense. I still stand by the principle but i should’ve bumped them into the teens at least.

Hu: I think partially influenced by Quinn missing the early season, but also because in the Burning Skirts games I watched, Blume was so dominant and looked like she alone was shouldering a large portion of UC Santa Barbara’s offense and defense. Honestly not much that I can think of in terms of what’s missing from her, just haven’t seen as much from Quinn this season.
Having Schwartz so low is definitely surprising for me given that she’s probably one of the best throwers in the division – if not the best – and is also a key part of Tufts’ notable success this year.

Scott Dunham (Contributing Writer & Data Analyst): The main reason I ranked Lia Schwartz and Kat McGuire much lower than others did is that I see them both as less complete players than those I ranked higher. I find Schwartz one-dimensional. She has excellent throws, but she is not a threat downfield and has limited reach, and thus can be denied the disc. I also have seen that she can be exploited on defense. My issue with McGuire is throwing, especially vs zone defense; perhaps I am overly influenced by the Michigan-Stanford game in which she had the majority of Michigan’s turnovers (9), all on throws.

>Stephens: Kiana, you watched Schwartz extensively – sans Emily Kemp – at Stanford Invite. What do you think about Scott’s take?

Hu: While Schwartz certainly isn’t Tufts’ best downfield player, I’ve seen her been able to effectively attack that space especially when she’s pushed out of the handler set. That being said, I think EWO’s overall strength of throwers (and thus allowing her to basically hang out deep in the zone points at Stanford Invite where she was guarded by a box-and-one) makes her less of a vital cog to their offense. I’m actually mostly considering her play in the final at Queen City Tune-Up, where it was clear that she alone was dictating that game, even if primarily through her throws. That ability to huck upwind is so rare in the college women’s division, and I don’t think she can be considered enough of a liability downfield or on defense to detract from that skill.

Raynor: I’m one of three of us with Lia Schwartz at #4 and that is a nod to the value of an elite and dynamic thrower. I’d rate her the best thrower in the division as a combination of a range, touch, versatility, decision making, and consistency. And that is still the cleanest and clearest path to elite college ultimate success. Beyond that throwing ability, she’s mostly maximizing with her tools and able to compete in those areas, even if she’s not a top tier defender or downfield threat.
Gordon: Schwartz certainly benefits from leading Tufts to victories at two tournaments where wind was heavily a factor – we got to see her as the preeminent upwind thrower on any field that she was playing on and be a difference-maker in a number of games. I also agree with Kiana that reducing her to just a thrower is dishonest. She’s great at all of the other handler skills, namely getting open in the backfield, rarely denied the disc. She can also find ways to stay involved when pushed downfield, in the rare occasion that teams are able to successfully do so.

Stephens: Ditto on all the Schwartz report, but let’s change the subject. I have some explaining to do with regard to my Weybright ranking: This feels weird to say, but I feel like I’m not seeing enough separation in the iso cutting or consistency in the deep throwing for the role they’re taking on. It feels to me (in a wishy-washy, vibes-y sort of way) that I’m a little low on the system decisions that involve Weybright. But we’re not here to rank systems, so my thoughts on that are reflected in my ranking of the player instead. Clearly top-15 for me, but also a very clear not-top-10 at this exact moment in time.

Surely Trout will make me look foolish in Washington, though.

Gerhart: I’ll be honest, I haven’t seen much tape from Northwest Challenge, and I know that’s where Gelfand feasted but what I have see from Santa Barbara Invite and Queen City Tune Up showed me a really skilled player who could do everything for Carleton. And I guess I wrote that off a bit because it feels like Carleton have three or four of those players? I’m clearly way off on this and I’m happy to be wrong, but I still think that it’s Gelfand’s role on the team that sets her up to hit her highest potential, and I still wonder if there’s a level beyond what we’re seeing right now.

Is there a player in your top 10 you feel like is getting majorly disrespected by the rest of the group? Now’s the time to tell everyone else why you went out on a limb.

Raynor: Frankly, I don’t feel out on a limb; I feel like the rest of you jumped off of one! Especially as it pertains to Tori Gray. Gray’s #5 ranking in 2024 came during a Player of the Year-quality campaign and her game has gotten better with another year of semi-pro and club under her belt. She’s a better load-bearing offensive piece. She’s probably still the best one on one defender in the division. She’s a fantastic and willing deep thrower. I don’t know how she fell so far, although the participants dropping her outside of the top 25 is an inexcusable part of the problem.

I’m still a firm believer in Caroline Stone’s total game impact. I do think being more central without Kennedy McCarthy and Lucy Toppen has been a bit of a challenge and that Vermont has disappointed. But we are still talking about one of the division’s most powerful players in the air and behind the disc. She’s still working to reign it in, but there just aren’t a lot of players with her ceiling as a takeover piece.

Conerly: Ditto on Gray – what the heck are we doing here folks?!!

I am also a firm believe that Quincy Booth (Georgia) is a top-10 player. She is a 6’+ lefty handler with phenomenal throws and is perpetually open as a reset. She is a fantastic piece to build any college team around! I also have benefitted, in terms of this perspective, from playing against her in a ton in college, club, and PUL. Trust me, I know what I am talking about.

Gerhart: I think part of the problem with Tori Gray is that she doesn’t fit the system of UC San Diego in the same way that the players brought up in the program do. So she took some time to really look like she was clicking in the same way that she had as recently as last year.

I think Rachel Chang (UC Santa Cruz) being disrespected by the staff is a real error. Their peers and the subscribers know what’s up. Chang is an elite thrower and is severely underrated as a defender. Let’s not forget, San Francisco Fury don’t let slouches onto their roster! There are way too many people above them that don’t have the same pedigree, in my opinion. I know Chang has some chatter in the other categories so I’m not going to belabor this but I thought it was crazy how low others ranked them.

Stephens: For. Goodness. Sake. People. Or, rather: For GODDU’s sake.

You’re all late on your appraisal of Lauren Goddu (Washington), and I’m right on time. She’s got the biggest long-term potential of any player in the division, and she spent all of Northwest Challenge straight up stunting on fools. Definition of a five-tool player, and everything she does, form-wise and decision-wise, looks like it was minted in a ‘How to Play Great Ultimate’ factory.

The Top 25 and Beyond

---

1. Our experience has shown that participants’ ballots trend towards regional concentrations and emphasizing the strength of their teammates, as well as other quirks such as occasionally not ranking themselves, which is why their ballots are weighted in this manner. ↩