My pet theory, which I incoherently (I'm more used to writing about hockey than talking about it) proposed to Scooter Saturday night:
The Rockets see themselves as contenders next season, justifiably so. They also see the Winterhawks as a major rival, if not the major rival in the Western Conference next season.
They'd never admit it, but above all else, for the Rockets this is a prelude to taking Portland head-on next year. If they can win a game, win two games, even win the series, that's great, but it's gravy. It's about next year, sending a message to the Winterhawks, getting experience for the Rockets' kids.
I've seen teams that are heavy underdogs alter their style of play a little bit, play more defensively, focus on stopping the opposition and get a lucky goal or two to pull the game out. I haven't seen that from Kelowna. I get the sense they're trying to win playing their style, they're willing to skate and press Portland some, even though it's hard to see at this point that they can win over a long series playing that way. Because short-term it might keep the series closer and give them a better chance to win, but it won't help them as much for next year, when presumably they'll be more able to win playing their favored style.
Also think about Myles Bell. He's been invisible playing forward for two games. Meanwhile the Rockets are getting overmatched and worn out on the back line playing primarily four defensemen, and four young defensemen. Is there any doubt Bell could help them more in this series playing back there? They're not doing it, to the extent that they've been using Tanner Moar, who's played forward most of the year although he was a defenseman in bantams, as the sixth defenseman. Is the move of Bell to forward going to be permanent, and has the conversion begun already?
The chippiness of the first two games speaks for itself. Just a theory, but for some reason I've spent a lot of time thinking about next season while watching this series.