Olesz and Schremp

[Qubax]

All we hear about is Ovechkin but what are these two guys going to be like...?

What's Schremp like..? Playmaking centreman? Modano, sakic...?

I have no idea...If these are arguably the top two players out of the 2004 draft after Ovechkin what are there upsides..?

Thanks

Click to read more...

 

[moosefan]

Olesz has it all, great defensive play, very strong and is physical and gritty. Very exciting offensive player with great moves with the puck and is capable at both a finess power forward game.

 

[Jovavic]

I've see it written (here, maybe) that Olesz is the best Czech prospect since Jagr. The kid must be very special to get that kind of praise.

Anyone think teams will shy away from picking any Russian players (even Ovechkin) because of the Russian Federation and the IIHF agreement ending in the summer? Unless the team picking the players throw alot of cash at their Russian clubs, it'll be very hard to get them over here.

 

[Evilo]

Yes it's true (about Olesz). But isn't it each year that we get a new Jagr, a new Bure, etc...?
That said Olesz certainly has some talent.
I wouldn't compare him to one of the best ever just yet, as many media do...

 

[Epsilon]

I've see it written (here, maybe) that Olesz is the best Czech prospect since Jagr. The kid must be very special to get that kind of praise.

Anyone think teams will shy away from picking any Russian players (even Ovechkin) because of the Russian Federation and the IIHF agreement ending in the summer? Unless the team picking the players throw alot of cash at their Russian clubs, it'll be very hard to get them over here.

No because in the case of Ovechkin (and Evgeni Malkin) the cash they spend will definitely be worth it.

 

[Aaron Vickers]

No because in the case of Ovechkin (and Evgeni Malkin) the cash they spend will definitely be worth it.

But even if they're worth it, there'll be absolutely no guarintee they will be able to buy him out from his club team.

 

[Epsilon]

But even if they're worth it, there'll be absolutely no guarintee they will be able to buy him out from his club team.

Well, there are risks with all sorts of players.

-if you pick a guy from somewhere else in Europe, there's still no guarantee that he will come over immediately (although you will probably pay less when he does).

-if you draft a guy from the CHL, there's no guarantee he won't just play there for two years and go back into the draft or become a free agent.

-if you draft a guy from the NCAA, there's no guarantee he won't play out his entire NCAA career and hit the NHL much later than you would like.

Given that the draft is such a crap shoot to begin with, I personally don't think these sorts of things should enter into the thinking of teams, UNLESS they have a bunch of guys rated as equal and need to go to non-hockey factors to decide on one.

 

[kingsfan]

But even if they're worth it, there'll be absolutely no guarintee they will be able to buy him out from his club team.

I'm in the dark here, but why do the teams even have to buy the player out from his european club? I can understand if the guy is under contract to that team, but if he's not, why do they have to buy him out. Why can't they just let the player play there till his contract is up then sign him?

 

[Slay]

I'm in the dark here, but why do the teams even have to buy the player out from his european club? I can understand if the guy is under contract to that team, but if he's not, why do they have to buy him out. Why can't they just let the player play there till his contract is up then sign him?

Because it is compensation to the club that made the young player, put a lot of money in his development from his first steps in hockey. Otherwise it looks as stealing players by teams that didn't have any relation to formation of the player, and just want to take prepared hockey player. But that is just not right, there have to be a credit, compensation to a club/school that raised the hockey player, otherwise this hockey school won't exist and won't raise good players anymore.

The money that nhl clubs pay for the european players doesn't compensate the cost of developing of the new player from his first steps in hockey.

Not sure how it is now but in Soviet times hockey schools were free so the club carried most financial load about the preparing of the player, his hockey ammunition and so on.

 

[X-SHARKIE]

NO TEAM! no one! in there right mind would pass up Ovechkin next year. Even if the IHF has it's problems.

 

[Aaron Vickers]

Because it is compensation to the club that made the young player, put a lot of money in his development from his first steps in hockey. Otherwise it looks as stealing players by teams that didn't have any relation to formation of the player, and just want to take prepared hockey player. But that is just not right, there have to be a credit, compensation to a club/school that raised the hockey player, otherwise this hockey school won't exist and won't raise good players anymore.

The money that nhl clubs pay for the european players doesn't compensate the cost of developing of the new player from his first steps in hockey.

Not sure how it is now but in Soviet times hockey schools were free so the club carried most financial load about the preparing of the player, his hockey ammunition and so on.

On top of that, even the younger players are locked into contracts with their club teams. In order for these club teams to release the players from their contracts so they can go play overseas, they want financial compensation, bigtime.

 

[kingsfan]

Because it is compensation to the club that made the young player, put a lot of money in his development from his first steps in hockey. Otherwise it looks as stealing players by teams that didn't have any relation to formation of the player, and just want to take prepared hockey player. But that is just not right, there have to be a credit, compensation to a club/school that raised the hockey player, otherwise this hockey school won't exist and won't raise good players anymore.

The money that nhl clubs pay for the european players doesn't compensate the cost of developing of the new player from his first steps in hockey.

Not sure how it is now but in Soviet times hockey schools were free so the club carried most financial load about the preparing of the player, his hockey ammunition and so on.

Why can't the team just sell tickets like everyone else? Fact is, the IIHF has no legal right that I can see to force players to play for a team until the NHL team buys his release if that player isn't under contract with the european team anymore. I can understand buying out the players contract if he is still signed, but why can't a player like Zherdev just let his contract expire if he wants and then go over to Columbus instead of doing the buy out?

 

[HAWKSWINHAWKSWIN]

How long?

Why can't the team just sell tickets like everyone else? Fact is, the IIHF has no legal right that I can see to force players to play for a team until the NHL team buys his release if that player isn't under contract with the european team anymore. I can understand buying out the players contract if he is still signed, but why can't a player like Zherdev just let his contract expire if he wants and then go over to Columbus instead of doing the buy out?

would the team have him signed for? I would think it would be at least two or three years, which would mean you wouldn't see them until they were 21 or so.

The NHL is out there taking the best players in the world away from teams. They should have to pay for that luxury. A league spends time and money to develop players to lose them to the NHL. This is why we have the best league in the world. Besides, whats $100k to a team here? Jagr makes more than that for every game he plays....