Wolski player of the year in the OHL !!

OilerOlli*

Guest
Roman Tanner said:
This one was clear cut in my opinion. Frankly, I'm surprised Schremp got as many votes as he did.

Yes, really surprising that Schremp got votes at all. He played a horrible season, and obviously didn't score enough... :shakehead
 

burgundynblue

Registered User
Aug 7, 2005
1,907
3
OilerOlli said:
Yes, really surprising that Schremp got votes at all. He played a horrible season, and obviously didn't score enough... :shakehead
So.. Wolski scored at higher rate than Schremp. Then, Wolski got 4 player of the month awards in a row, he was dominant in the OHL All-stars game, he has improved more as the season went on, plain and simple. :teach:
 

NYIschremp44

Registered User
Oct 25, 2003
1,009
237
NYC
motojime said:
So.. Wolski scored at higher rate than Schremp. Then, Wolski got 4 player of the month awards in a row, he was dominant in the OHL All-stars game, he has improved more as the season went on, plain and simple. :teach:

man i'd love to see the calculator you used to determine that 47 goals in 56 games is a "HIGHER RATE" than Rob's 57 goals in 57 games? Or maybe points in which Rob's 145 points in 57 games is still a "HIGHER RATE" than WOJO's 128 in 56 games. I know stats aren't everything, but if you're going to make claims based on them--at least let them be correct.
 

HFNHL Canadiens

Registered User
Aug 12, 2004
2,225
6
Guelph
JNRhockeyGURU said:
man i'd love to see the calculator you used to determine that 47 goals in 56 games is a "HIGHER RATE" than Rob's 57 goals in 57 games? Or maybe points in which Rob's 145 points in 57 games is still a "HIGHER RATE" than WOJO's 128 in 56 games. I know stats aren't everything, but if you're going to make claims based on them--at least let them be correct.
I think he was referring to the last half of the season, i could be wrong though..
 

MomentsofSanity

Registered User
Sep 20, 2005
539
1
London, ON
In my opinion the award could have easily have come down to a flip of the coin. Both had amazing years, however, Wolski was definately bolstered by the second half he had.

In the first two months of the season all that I heard from Brampton fans was how disappointed they were with his lack of production and his apparently lack of desire to perform after being sent back from Colorado... That was certainly silenced once he hit his stride.

Schremp had more points and was consistent all year but, he did have ALOT of help in that area from his supporting cast. As a London fan it doesn't bother me one bit seeing WOlski get the nod but, I could see this award going either way. There are arguments to be made for both being equally deserving.
 

thomasincanada

Registered User
Mar 7, 2005
1,691
0
London, ON
Pete Rock said:
I thought I had touched on the subject of him deserving the award. :dunno:

I'll grant you that me not liking Schremp and whether or not Schremp deserved an award for most outstanding player aren't directly related, but the discussion had to be brought up when you referred to me as a "crybaby".

Pete Rock said:
But most of all, I'm generally bored with people defending certain players vehemently like they were brothers and then resorting to name calling.

You were the one that started using the term "crybaby". I found it immature to use the term to begin with, but I'm glad to see you felt the same way after it was applied to you. Don't throw around insults if you can't take them yourself.

Basically, no matter how you justify it to yourself, you're highjacking these threads whenever you bring in what happened in Mississauga to a completely unrelated topic.
 

DFF

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
22,275
6,525
but the great Darryl Sutter prefer Kris Chucko over Wolski, Meszaros and Schremp though...

Sutter has done some good things in Calgary but when it comes to drafting he is a total dumbass...he and his clutch and grab philosophy :shakehead

Yeah, I know he drafted Phaneuf but that was fallen right into his lap.
 

tsunami

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
182
0
Bienne - Switzerland
Visit site
Pete Rock said:
I thought I had touched on the subject of him deserving the award. :dunno:

I'll grant you that me not liking Schremp and whether or not Schremp deserved an award for most outstanding player aren't directly related, but the discussion had to be brought up when you referred to me as a "crybaby".



I'm generally bored with people making jokes like "I liked his album" in Jack Johnson threads. I'm generally bored with people butchering the English language and displaying horrific typing skills. I'm generally bored with people making up excuses for players like, "He was only 16" like his age makes up for the fact that he was a complete putz. But most of all, I'm generally bored with people defending certain players vehemently like they were brothers and then resorting to name calling.

I'm generally bored with you :innocent:
 

Pete Rock

Registered User
Oct 22, 2005
2,180
0
Mrs. Sauga
thomasincanada said:
You were the one that started using the term "crybaby". I found it immature to use the term to begin with, but I'm glad to see you felt the same way after it was applied to you. Don't throw around insults if you can't take them yourself.

Are you Rob Schremp?

If not, I have no idea how I insulted you, so what right does that give you to call me a crybaby? Does it make you feel big to defend his honour?

I'm all for taking insults when I give them out, but you're in no position to do so.

thomasincanada said:
Basically, no matter how you justify it to yourself, you're highjacking these threads whenever you bring in what happened in Mississauga to a completely unrelated topic.

Rob Schremp was the topic. I talked about Rob Schremp.

How this is a "completely unrelated topic" is beyond me.
 

thomasincanada

Registered User
Mar 7, 2005
1,691
0
London, ON
Pete Rock said:
Are you Rob Schremp?

If not, I have no idea how I insulted you, so what right does that give you to call me a crybaby? Does it make you feel big to defend his honour?

I'm all for taking insults when I give them out, but you're in no position to do so.

So basically you prefer to throw out insults to people who aren't here to defend themselves and hope that nobody responds?

I happen to like Schremp, in spite of what he did to Mississauga. Maybe it's because I understood there were other reasons for him wanting the trade outside of hockey. Maybe it's because I'm not an IceDogs fan and I wasn't around first hand for the whole issue. It doesn't really matter why. However, because I like him I will defend him if he's being insulted. Simple as that, nothing about his honour or anything..

I certainly didn't feel big about it. I don't feel big when I discipline my child either, but sometimes it needs to be done.

Pete Rock said:
Rob Schremp was the topic. I talked about Rob Schremp.

How this is a "completely unrelated topic" is beyond me.

The "topic" was whether Rob Schremp's year was good enough to earn OHL player of the year. It wasn't "What does everyone on this board think of what Rob Schremp did in Mississauga?". If you don't understand the difference I can't help you.
 

Pete Rock

Registered User
Oct 22, 2005
2,180
0
Mrs. Sauga
thomasincanada said:
So basically you prefer to throw out insults to people who aren't here to defend themselves and hope that nobody responds?

No. I expect people to respond with thoughtful comments not, "I know you are but what am I?".

thomasincanada said:
The "topic" was whether Rob Schremp's year was good enough to earn OHL player of the year. It wasn't "What does everyone on this board think of what Rob Schremp did in Mississauga?". If you don't understand the difference I can't help you.

Why should me not liking Schremp completely invalidate any comments I had? Just because you like him does it mean that I should be "bored" of you people making those comments?

Discussions of players being great should probably contain opinions of those that think he's a one-man talent-machine as opposed to a wonderful player who plays for a team and will base his successes on that team not on his own accomplishments, or at the very least will provide his hated team with at least fair market value in return for his sulking antics.

You like him, I don't. Is he talented? Even IMO yes. But would I pick him as the most valuable player in the league? Obviously not.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->