Sammy
04-04-2005, 04:57 PM
No question about the Blazer's individual and team work ethic. It was outstanding! And the series was outstanding.
But as we all know, hockey is not only an outstanding game, it is an unforgiving game, and it unfortunately takes more than hard work to win big playoff games. It takes big talent. Big guns win big games.
Let's compare:
Mahovsky: 6-3-9 (+3)
Taylor: 2-4-6 (+6)
Total ICE: 8-7-15 (+9)
vs.
Jorgensen: 0-4-4 (0)
Richards: 2-2-4 (-10)
Total KAM: 2-6-8 (-10)
Despite the limits of stat, my obervation is that Kamloops lost mainly due to the Ice's superiority at their top centre positions, and the stats reflect this. This is not to say that Richards with an atrocious plus/minus, or Jorgensen who was actually one of the better Kam forwards despite not scoring, were exclusively to blame (eg. winger Hogg's 0-3-3 (-8) also sticks out like a sore thumb as does the inexperienced d-corps): it's just that in the end, the Ice had better centres. And better players, especially better centres, win games.
But as we all know, hockey is not only an outstanding game, it is an unforgiving game, and it unfortunately takes more than hard work to win big playoff games. It takes big talent. Big guns win big games.
Let's compare:
Mahovsky: 6-3-9 (+3)
Taylor: 2-4-6 (+6)
Total ICE: 8-7-15 (+9)
vs.
Jorgensen: 0-4-4 (0)
Richards: 2-2-4 (-10)
Total KAM: 2-6-8 (-10)
Despite the limits of stat, my obervation is that Kamloops lost mainly due to the Ice's superiority at their top centre positions, and the stats reflect this. This is not to say that Richards with an atrocious plus/minus, or Jorgensen who was actually one of the better Kam forwards despite not scoring, were exclusively to blame (eg. winger Hogg's 0-3-3 (-8) also sticks out like a sore thumb as does the inexperienced d-corps): it's just that in the end, the Ice had better centres. And better players, especially better centres, win games.