In The Cage With Tigerpaws

Information about Edinburgh

Visitors since March 17, 2003.
--


  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Comparing the Blades and the Waxers

April 1 2008 at 10:45 AM
No score for this post

  (Login fillibuster)

-
Blades 53 goals scored in 16 games. Waxers 83 goals scored in 18 games. Edge-Waxers.

Scott Greenham, Blades 33 goals against in 16 games. Average 1.96
Kyle Rank, Waxers 43 goals against in 17 games. Average 2.51. Edge-Blades.

Game breaker- Blades - Nick McParland 21 points, 7 goals...Waxers-David Kostuch 21 goals, 32 points. Edge Waxers.

Powerplay goals- Waxers 28 (Kostuck 6), Blades 16- Edge Waxers.

Shorthanded goals- Waxers 7 (Kostuch 3), Blades 3 (Cimadamore 2). Edge-Waxers.

Powerplay success percentage- Blades 16 of 87 for 18.39%. Waxers 28 of 109 for 25.69%. Edge-Waxers.

Penalty-killing..Blades 88.14%, Waxers..90.76%. Edge-Waxers.

Short-handed goals against - Waxers 2, Blades 0. Edge-Blades.

Other stats of note..game-winning goals Blades- McParland, Julian Cimadamore, Kellan Lain 3 each. Waxers- Corey Tamblyn 3. Murray Free, Mark Cornacchia, Giancarlo Iuorio, Claudio Cowdrey 2 each.

Penalty leaders in mins. -Blades Lain 52, Scott Judson 41. Waxers Free 44, Cody Hamilton 40, Steven Harding 39.

Assist leaders- Blades- McParland 14, Chris Haltigin 12. Waxers- Hamilton, Michael Scheu 17, Kevin Hudes 16.


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
SMC57
(Login SMC57)

Re: Comparing the Blades and the Waxers

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 10:52 AM 

Toss the stats Ron, the Blades will take the Waxers in 6.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
ezzig
(Login ezzig)

ok

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 12:03 PM 

Thanks for the prediction,one questionhave you seen the wax....I wont predict cause ive only seen oakville once,lets just say I feel very confident the wax will prevail.And on a side note....thanks I would hate to have someone pick us to win,since weve been the underdogs all playoffs!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
SMC57
(Login SMC57)

Re: ok

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 2:54 PM 

"ezzig"

You must be referring to my thread since Ron has given the edge to the Waxers in most areas. If you are referring to my "Blades in 6" comment, I base it on having seen most of the Waxer/Buzzer series and the Waxer/Dukes series. And of course I've seen all the Aurora/Oakville series.

Based on what I have seen to date, the Blade's have speed, size and talent but where I see they will take the Waxers will be on "depth" which is a team's most important asset if they want to go all the way to the RBC. It is a tough grind to get there and to win is even tougher. The Tigers had the "depth" last year and that was the ingredient that took them all the way and won them the RBC Cup. The Waxers also have what it takes to win, but I don't think they have the "depth" that the Blades have. In the end, that most important ingredient will always win out and is my reason for calling the Blades in 6 games.

Either way, it is going to be a great series.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

WEXDOG
(Login wexdog)

Under / Over

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 1:15 PM 

Everyone cannot be an underdog.

Oakville - the favorite(as they were in the previous series)
Markham - the underdog






Go Raptors !
Go Jays !


WEXDOG
09,11,01
Lest We Forget
11,11,11

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   


(Login fillibuster)

Re: Under / Over

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 1:51 PM 

I have seen Markham play..at least a little bit this season..they were playing the Burlington Cougars in the College Weekend and in the intermissions of the Red Wings and Derbys game next door I watched the see-saw battle which Markham won 6-5. Michael Catenacci had two goals but has only played 8 playoff games and has no points. Michael Scheu got the winner close to the end and a guy called Matt Hansell was the goalie. Michael Colavecchia had a goal and he is not ton the roster now.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

Tony Hayward
(Login THAYWARD)
Forum Owner

Re: Under / Over

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 1:52 PM 

What the hell is wrong with you just lately 'Dog? I know that it was one hell of a shock to the system when Wexford went t!ts up but get over it already would ya please? You barely post anymore, and when you do it's full of negativety and whining! You used to provide some good insight a few years back, but now it's Wa" Wa! Wa!

I don't know what ever happened to you and "Ms" Blake, but give it up already would ya? I'm afraid that a threads going to have to start soon to put WEXDOG on suicide watch! Smarten up 'Dog!


 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login vanny41)

Re: Under / Over

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 3:06 PM 

Thank you Tony. I was starting to think it was just me.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login Loopy21)

Re: Under / Over

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 4:01 PM 

Waxers in 4

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(Login JustWatching_18)

Re: Under / Over

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 4:11 PM 

Wow thats a bold statement....I would put money on that not happening

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   


(Login fillibuster)

Re: Under / Over

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 4:11 PM 

If Waxers win in four I will eat my hat.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
CCblake
(Login CCblake)

RON SAY'S

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 4:23 PM 

I have seen Markham play..at least a little bit this season..they were playing the Burlington Cougars in the College Weekend
Roaster's are not even set at College Weekend so that not a good example of saying you saw a team play. But anyways we will see.
GO BLADES GO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
SMC57
(Login SMC57)

Re: RON SAY'S

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 4:47 PM 

They have "Chickens" at the College Weekend??

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
CCblake
(Login CCblake)

OOPS

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 4:59 PM 

I mean ROSTERS big typo
GO BLADES GO!!!!!!!!!!!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
ezzig
(Login ezzig)

ketchup....

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 4:28 PM 

or just plain.....No predictions here although i did predict wax over dukes in 5 and over st.mikes in 6,To be honest not to impressed with oakville,as far as depth goes all teams go with 2 lines this time of year oakville did last night as well as wax for the most part../If i must wax in 5

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
ezzig
(Login ezzig)

tony...

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 4:59 PM 

how come my answer to ron is out of sequence,.Thanks tony,i come up with a funny and phhhh its cut before it has a chance...lol my answer was to ron about eating his hat...

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
SMC57
(Login SMC57)

Re: tony...

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 5:41 PM 

"ezzig"

Unlike Forum 54, on the Tigerpaw Forum you can respond to each and every thread. You should have clicked on Ron's thread about eating his hat, and your reply would have come up right under Ron's thread, like mine did with CCBlake's "Roasters" typo.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(Login CHLfanBurlington)

Re: tony...

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 5:57 PM 

I've seen Markham play several times this year. A couple of times in the regular season and a couple of times in the playoffs (vs Dixie and St. Mike's). They are a very chippy, team and trash talk frequently. The Waxers will definately try to agitate the Blades and get them off their game. Some of Markham's players are playing the best hockey they'll every play (perfect example is Murray Free). We have yet to see the best of some of the Blades (Cimadamore). Overall, there is more talent on the Oakville roster IMO. Oakville needs to compete for a 3 full periods in every game. They will not be successful if they have to come back every game because of a poor effort in the first. If the Blades compete hard and consistently and stay out of the box they should win IMO.

Blades in 5

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
ezzig
(Login ezzig)

I agree with the way ron....

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 6:57 PM 

put it,catagorizing things,(no matter who you cheer for) not that they chirp,whats that,all teams do it!I will stick to my guns markham in 5 for the educated reasons that ron gave,not for my personal reasons.As i say not fair to judge a team if you really have not seen them,but i see real stats as good reasons not rose coloured glasses(not saying you are just making a point)I just feel Markhams offense is amazing,extremely deep up front,and in goal Rank has been unconscious,dont just believe me ask anyone on st. mikes how well rank played...and speed in my 30 plus years following hockey Tamblyn and cornnachia are two of the fastest (not the fastest ive ever seen)but close...gonna be a good series...

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

(Login Loopy21)

Re: tony...

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 6:58 PM 

8 out of 10 top scoring players in the playoffs are from markham. 1 is from oakville. but Oakville has more talent?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
CCblake
(Login CCblake)

Your name suits you

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 7:02 PM 

This game will be played on the ice. Goodluck to both teams.
GO BLADES GO!!!!!!!!

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

Matty B
(Login Matty__B)

Re: tony...

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 7:08 PM 

Waxers play an extra three games where they scored 22 goals. Waxers have also played 3 very tough teams while Oakville has only played 2.

I love how the Waxers are not the team that seems to chirp the most. I disagree on that point and agree with Ezzig that all teams do it.

If you saw the Waxers in the regular season then you have yet to see the real Markham Waxers. If you saw them in the last 3 rounds of the playoffs and still doubt them then maybe your underestimating their opponents.

Going to be a tough series that could go either way. Since I have yet to see Oakville play I can not judge how they will match up against the Waxers, but I believe the Waxers will take it. Based on nothing, but my belief in the group of guys in that locker room.

Toronto Maple Leafs= Ford Motor Company

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
SMC57
(Login SMC57)

Re: tony...

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 8:37 PM 

"loopy21"

The less scorers a winning team has in the top 10, 20 or whatever, usually indicates a lot of depth with scoring spread over many players instead of a few.

For example, the powerful Tiger RBC team of 2007, had only 5 players in the top 65 scorers at the end of the regular OPJHL season, yet their record was 44-4-1-0 for 89 pts and an overall 1st place finish. In fact the Tigers leading scorer Andrew Favot, finished 28 pts behind the leading scorer Scott Freeman of Bowmanville. Freeman and David Ross of the Eagles finished 1st and 2nd in scoring. The Eagles did not get out of the East Division last year.

At the end of 25 games in the OPJHL playoffs, leading to the OPJHL Championship, the Tigers had only 13 players in the top 57 scorers, and yet their playoff record was 20-5.

Everyone knows that the main strength of the Tigers last season was DEPTH as the stats above would indicate. IMO the fact that the Blades do not have as many players in the top scorers as Markham in the playoffs, besides not having played as many games as the Waxers, is that they have more DEPTH on the team and their scoring is spread out. Stats can be very misleading as the Eagles found out last season.

As I said to Ron, toss the stats, it's a "new Ballgame".

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(Login hackman11)

Re: tony...

No score for this post
April 6 2008, 1:39 PM 

Markham, kings of the phantom points

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
SMC57
(Login SMC57)

Re: tony...

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 8:50 PM 

"CHLfanburlington"

Unfortunately for the Blades, they won't have Cimadamore for the 1st two games against the Waxers. His temper has weakened the Blades for the crucial start of the series.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   


(Login fillibuster)

Re: tony...

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 9:09 PM 

He and Thomson of the Tigers were both assessed 'travesty' penalties at the end of the game..what happened?

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Anonymous
(Login JustWatching_18)

Re: tony...

No score for this post
April 2 2008, 12:43 AM 

I thought what went on at the ened of the game was nothing to assess any kind of penalties for. Aurora was bitter they lost and they were getting in the middle of a celebration. I mean Holdsworth didn't do much right last night and why would you expect to not screw up the end of the game.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   

WEXDOG
(Login wexdog)

Re: Under / Over

No score for this post
April 1 2008, 7:23 PM 

What the hult are you yapping about now T ?

Everyone seems to want to be the underdog.
All I pointed out was that both teams cannot be the underdog.

As for CC, she had not even posted a message on this thread yet.






Go Raptors !
Go Jays !


WEXDOG
09,11,01
Lest We Forget
11,11,11

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   


(Login fillibuster)

Re: Under / Over

No score for this post
April 3 2008, 8:55 AM 

Without debating the strengths of each Division you would have to say that the Blades are the favourites due to their first place regular season finish, the fact that they accumulated twelve points more than Markham and wound up first while the Waxers came in third...regardless it should be a terrific series.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Vanny
(Login vanny41)

Re: Under / Over

No score for this post
April 6 2008, 2:31 PM 

Ron you can put your hat down. No need to eat it. Marham in four is now impossible.

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Current Topic - Comparing the Blades and the Waxers
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Find more forums on Junior HockeyCreate your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2008 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  
Please respect this forums guidelines, Network54's guidelines and your fellow participants.