With eight games completed in a 22-game schedule, the Plum varsity ice hockey team finds itself at 4-2-2, and its 10 points puts it in a tie for third place in PIHL Class AA with Armstrong.
The Mustangs suffered November losses to Armstrong (5-2) and AA co-leader Hampton (6-1), and Plum owns ties against Erie Prep (4-2-1, nine points) and Montour (1-5-1).
Moon, Greater Latrobe, Franklin Regional and North Hills have all fallen victim to the Mustangs, and Plum opens the December portion of its schedule Thursday evening against Bishop Canevin.
The Crusaders are tied with Hampton in the AA standings with a 6-1 record.
Because of the Thanksgiving holiday, Plum hasn't played since its strong 3-0 victory over West Allegheny on Nov. 25 at Pittsburgh Ice Arena in New Kensington.
That night, both the Mustangs and Indians fired off 34 shots, but the Plum defense and junior goaltender James Borriello stood tall.
Plum got a goal in every period against West Allegheny.
The Mustangs got all they would need late in the first period, as sophomore Zachary Keller put one past Indians goaltender Grant Gerstner for the first goal of his varsity career.
Juniors Austin Samarco and Blake Biertempfel assisted on the goal with 2:21 left in the opening period.
Freshman Dillon Joyce made it 2-0 with an unassisted, shorthanded goal — his third of the season — only 2:44 into the second period.
Junior David Stonebraker, tied for fifth in AA in points with 20 (12 goals, eight assists), capped the scoring in the third period with a goal assisted by senior Joe Randazzo. The assist was Randazzo's seventh of the season, and he is second on the team in goals with 11.
Both Randazzo (junior team) and Stonebraker (illness) have missed one game this season.
Michael Love is a staff writer with Trib Total Media. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org or via Twitter @Mlove_Trib.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.