National Lacrosse League 2012: Rochester Knighthawks Win Champion's Cup
The hometown Rochester Knighthawks defeated the Edmonton Rush 9-6 Saturday night at the Blue Cross Arena to win the 2012 Champion's Cup.
This was Rochester's first championship since 2007.
After staking Edmonton to a 5-1 lead in the first half, Rochester came out of the locker room strong in the second half, going on a 6-0 run in the third quarter and tallying seven straight before the Rush were finally able to get back on the scoreboard.
Forward Cody Jamieson earned game MVP honors, contributing points on eight of the Knighthawks' nine goals, with four goals and four assists.
Ultimately, though, the key to this game was goaltending.
Edmonton's Aaron Bold held Rochester to just a single second period goal on 11 shots in the first half. His second half was less impressive, but still solid, as he finished the game having turned aside 26 of 35 shots.
However, this was two-time NLL Goalie of the Year Matt Vinc's night to shine.
Vinc kept his team in the game in the first half, giving up just five goals on 31 Edmonton shots and setting the stage for the third-quarter comeback.
He was even tougher in the second half, surrendering just a single marker on 15 second-half shots.
This was Edmonton's first trip to the NLL finals and, although they came out of the gate strong, they just didn't have enough in the tank to finish what they started.
In spite of completely dominating the first half and getting off 17 more shots in the game, the Rush couldn't seal the deal with some big goals in the second half when they needed to respond to the Knighthawks.
Zack Greer paced the Rush attack, scoring the first two goals of the game and adding two helpers.
Rochester now gets a few months to celebrate before the league turns its eyes toward next season's draft and a new year of games, starting in 2013.
Congratulations to the Rochester Knighthawks, the 2012 NLL Champion's Cup winners.
Follow me @calgaryjimbo
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?