shremp

Status
Not open for further replies.

db23

Guest
Most scouts seemed to think that Dave Bolland outplayed Schremp when they were teammates and linemates in London. Bolland went #32 overall in the second round, so it is hard to justify Schremp going any higher than he did.
 

Oiltalk

Registered User
May 20, 2003
2,721
0
Edmonton
Visit site
db23 said:
Most scouts seemed to think that Dave Bolland outplayed Schremp when they were teammates and linemates in London. Bolland went #32 overall in the second round, so it is hard to justify Schremp going any higher than he did.
If that was the truth Bolland would have been higher on most teams lists.
 

db23

Guest
Oiltalk said:
If that was the truth Bolland would have been higher on most teams lists.

Bolland was higher on Central Scouting's list. He was #8 rated North American prospect, Schremp was the #10 rated North American prospect. Central Scouting is very thorough. They have been following these guys for 5 years or so. They have no axe to grind. The fact that Schremp and Bolland are similar types of players, play the same position and on the same team should make their ratings, relative to each other, fairly straightforward.
 

db23

Guest
Edmonton was looking for a forward in the draft going in. Lowe acknowledged that. He had his eye on Drew Stafford, but Stafford went one pick before the Oiler's. If he thought that Schremp was going to be that great, he would have taken him at #14. Instead they took Devan Dubnyk, who was the third rated goaltender, even though the Oilers are relatively deep in net. For the Oiler fans trying to convince themselves that Schremp was a major steal at #25, there isn't much evidence to back it up.
 

Seachd

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
24,937
8,946
db23 said:
Edmonton was looking for a forward in the draft going in. Lowe acknowledged that. He had his eye on Drew Stafford, but Stafford went one pick before the Oiler's. If he thought that Schremp was going to be that great, he would have taken him at #14. Instead they took Devan Dubnyk, who was the third rated goaltender, even though the Oilers are relatively deep in net. For the Oiler fans trying to convince themselves that Schremp was a major steal at #25, there isn't much evidence to back it up.
The Oilers took Dubnyk because they were very thin in net. After Deslauriers, there was nothing. How is that deep? By the way, he wasn't the third rated goalie for the Oilers. He was first.

I don't understand what you mean about evidence to back it up. The draft was a month ago. Isn't the evidence an NHL career?
 

db23

Guest
Seachd said:
I don't understand what you mean about evidence to back it up. The draft was a month ago. Isn't the evidence an NHL career?

.....Uh, O.K.....I guess we'll have to leave this thread for the next 15 years so we know how the pick turned out, and aren't just "speculating"... :shakehead
 

Seachd

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
24,937
8,946
db23 said:
.....Uh, O.K.....I guess we'll have to leave this thread for the next 15 years so we know how the pick turned out, and aren't just "speculating"... :shakehead
I didn't say that, but you brough up evidence. Give me evidence that he wasn't a steal, then? (And I'm not saying he was. I'm just wondering how you're proving he wasn't.)
 

GorillazXL

Registered User
Jun 21, 2003
1,185
0
Vancouver, BC
Visit site
To say that a player won't become a good NHLer because he's under 6' and isn't fast should look at Doug Weight. Weight plays a similar game to Schremp, both are shifty players with the puck, both aren't the fastest players on the ice yet they are hard to check because of their ability to control the play. I also wouldn't say Weight was in the best of shape when he played for the Oilers either, but yet his raw talent makes up for his lack of physical prowness. I also remember when Weight first played for the Oilers (early 90's) he was horrible on the back check (the only player on the Oilers who was worst at the time was Arnott), but his defensive game grew with experience. Weight didn't improve much from his first year at Lake Superior to his second yet he managed to developed into an excellent NHLer.

If you were to folow the formula:

Originally Posted by Boomhower
iii) Plays a very soft game, avoids as much physical contact as he possibly can.
iv) Can't score 5 on 5.
v) Isn't in great shape.
vi) Didn't improve much from last year.

Then Zach Parise shouldn't be much of a prospect either yet IMO he's a great player.

GXL
 

db23

Guest
Seachd said:
I didn't say that, but you brough up evidence. Give me evidence that he wasn't a steal, then? (And I'm not saying he was. I'm just wondering how you're proving he wasn't.)

For one, Central Scouting didn't have him rated that highly. 10th overall in North America in a year where most of the top end talent was in Europe. By that standard he was drafted about where CSS had him pegged to go. Throw in 10 Euro skaters and a few goalies and you're looking at the #25 pick.

Secondly CSS, who spend a lot of time watching these guys, rated his teammate Bolland higher at #8 in N.A. and Bolland went in the second round.

Thirdly, Lowe said he was looking for a forward in the draft with his #14 overall pick, and passed over Schremp for a goalie which was less of a priority. Surely if Schremp was a "steal" at #25, he wouldn't be a "reach" at #14, would he? There was more reason to expect that Dubnyk would still be there at #25, than Schremp.

My impression of the Oilers first round is that they took Schremp where he should have gone, and reached for Dubnyk. I would never use a first rounder on a goalie other than Lehtonen or Luongo in any case. Does the name Brent Krahn ring a bell?
 

Vlad The Impaler

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,315
644
Montreal
Fleury14 said:
When a 5'11' 200 pound player is considered small (for a prospect to boot), today's scouts (or wannabe scouts) really need to readjust their priorities.

There are no priorities stated. 5'11 is small. That is a fact, which was pointed out.

The 200 pounds is actually worrisome based on reports from the combine. Doesn't look like it's muscle.

Anything else?
 

Boomhower

Registered User
Aug 23, 2003
5,169
1
Ontario
Visit site
GorillazXL said:
To say that a player won't become a good NHLer because he's under 6' and isn't fast should look at Doug Weight. Weight plays a similar game to Schremp, both are shifty players with the puck, both aren't the fastest players on the ice yet they are hard to check because of their ability to control the play. I also wouldn't say Weight was in the best of shape when he played for the Oilers either, but yet his raw talent makes up for his lack of physical prowness. I also remember when Weight first played for the Oilers (early 90's) he was horrible on the back check (the only player on the Oilers who was worst at the time was Arnott), but his defensive game grew with experience. Weight didn't improve much from his first year at Lake Superior to his second yet he managed to developed into an excellent NHLer.
Thats nice, but there are so many NHLers now, that there is a large group of NHL players that fit every possible mold of player you could think of. You could virtually pick any prospect on any team and say there are parrallels to "insert NHL players name here".... doesn't mean he has any better chance of panning out.

For every prospect that is compared to Doug Weight and turns out to be a similiar NHL player to Doug Weight, there are probably about 30 that were comparable to him and didn't even make it to the show.

GorillazXL said:
If you were to folow the formula:

Originally Posted by Boomhower
iii) Plays a very soft game, avoids as much physical contact as he possibly can.
iv) Can't score 5 on 5.
v) Isn't in great shape.
vi) Didn't improve much from last year.

Then Zach Parise shouldn't be much of a prospect either yet IMO he's a great player.
GXL

What does Parise have to do with anything? 'zamboni' was wondering at the top of the thread why (besides attitude) Schremp should have gone as "low" as he did. We were tossing out a few ideas on why GM's may have passed on Schremp.
 

Mizral

Registered User
Sep 20, 2002
18,187
2
Earth, MW
Visit site
There are several stories about Robbie Schremp, none of which I'm going to go into here as there are no links nor credible media sources saying them, so we'll just leave it at that. For this arguement, his 'attitude problems' really don't bother me.

The Bolland vs. Schremp arguement continues on and actually I think it Bolland slipped far too low to be honest. Bolland is around the same size as Schremp and not all *that* far behind in skill, but he makes up for it for his tenaciousness.

However, I can say this with a credible source (if you know anyone connected with the Oilers & the draft, they will tell you it to):

The Edmonton Oilers would have selected Kris Chucko with the #25 pick had he not gone to Calgary at #24.

....

But will Schremp become a player? Time will tell. There are a lot of issues with Schremp and he was a very high-risk pick. The Oilers have enough depth on the farm to take risks now and again though.
 

Cerebral

Registered User
Aug 4, 2003
23,262
565
Calgary, Alberta
Roughneck said:
Why is Schremp suddenly sounding like every report I've read about Jason Bosignore?
I don't think they're similar at all. Bonsignore flat out didn't like the sport of hockey and had no desire to continue playing it after getting drafted by the Oilers. He had all the talent in the world but absolutely no heart. Schremp appears to love the game and it looks like he really wants to become a good player. His attitude problems don't see to have any connection to his love for the game..
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,014
11,020
Murica
Schremp seems hell-bent on proving his detractors wrong and making the Oilers investment in him a good one. I think he's going to step up and be a great player. What I find hilarious is the so-called "evidence" people are citing to knock his game. He's an average sized player who is a good, but not outstanding skater. That's a far cry from the "small" and "slow" claims of many around here.
 

db23

Guest
You have things a little backwards, rabid, this thread started out (presumably by an Oiler fan), fishing for reasons that Scremp was a "steal" at #25. All I said was that there was "no evidence" to show that he should have gone much higher than that. Now you're getting into victim mode and whining about "detractors". Go back and read the thread.
 

windowlicker

Registered User
Jun 17, 2003
2,202
0
Murky Wisconsin
Visit site
Jay Thompson said:
However, I can say this with a credible source (if you know anyone connected with the Oilers & the draft, they will tell you it to):

The Edmonton Oilers would have selected Kris Chucko with the #25 pick had he not gone to Calgary at #24.

Kevin Prendergast stated that Chucko was the guy they wanted and thought should still be available at 25. They never banked on Schremp being around at 25, which is why they took him. If Chucko is still there at 25, Schremp still gets selected IMO. (Although per Kevin, the Oil were ready to call a time-out before announcing the 25th selection).
 

Slats432

Registered User
Jun 2, 2002
14,757
2,778
hockeypedia.com
db23 said:
Instead they took Devan Dubnyk, who was the third rated goaltender, even though the Oilers are relatively deep in net.

This particular statement shows a lack of understanding of the Oilers organization. Regardless of your feelings about Schremp, this statement is just plain wrong.
 

Seachd

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
24,937
8,946
db23 said:
Thirdly, Lowe said he was looking for a forward in the draft with his #14 overall pick, and passed over Schremp for a goalie which was less of a priority. Surely if Schremp was a "steal" at #25, he wouldn't be a "reach" at #14, would he? There was more reason to expect that Dubnyk would still be there at #25, than Schremp.

That's like saying Chicago was looking for a forward, but passed one up because they wanted Barker.

Edmonton wasn't looking for "a forward", they were looking for Stafford. You still don't seem to understand that a goalie was, quite obviously, a priority.

I was praying for Schremp at 14.
 

Jacob

as seen on TV
Feb 27, 2002
49,341
24,736
infinitesadd said:
No, I'm comparing important games where young players where sat. Next time read what I said.
Next time I'll just skip your post altogether, because your statement was idiotic, at best.
 
Last edited:

infinitesadd

Registered User
May 15, 2004
933
0
Pittsburgh
No reason to presonally attack me for a statement that makes sense. If you disagree fine, no reason to say that though. I've never disrespected you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->