shremp

Status
Not open for further replies.

db23

Guest
George Bachul said:
If you have some inside information on why Schremp was benched in the playoffs please share.(And I think earlier in the thread you used "Lazy")

Do you know why he was benched?

I wasn't there, and even if I was, I probably wouldn't know the precise reason, but from what I've read Schremp had a very indifferent playoff series and some other players were playing well. Pretty much the standard reason that players get benched. They aren't the best available option at the time. The original thread was postulating whether Schremp was a "steal" at #25. That would mean he "should have" gone top 10 at least, right? So take 15-20 players that were drafted ahead of Schremp and tell me that he has better potential than each one. It can't be done.

Every team's fans can look at the palyer their team picked and find some reason why he might have been underrated. One guy might have been hurt, another guy just needs to add a few pounds, another guy just needs to work on his skating a bit, yada, yada..But mainly it's just wishful thinking.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Slats432

Registered User
Jun 2, 2002
14,757
2,778
hockeypedia.com
db23 said:
I wasn't there, and even if I was, I probably wouldn't know the precise reason, but from what I've read Schremp had a very indifferent playoff series and some other players were playing well. Pretty much the standard reason that players get benched. They aren't the best available option at the time. The original thread was postulating whether Schremp was a "steal" at #25. That would mean he "should have" gone top 10 at least, right? So take 15-20 players that were drafted ahead of Schremp and tell me that he has better potential than each one. It can't be done.
Well, that isn't exactly true. All I want to say is that some of your comments aren't indicative of factual information but sound more like someone in the thread annoyed you and you are taking out your ire on Robbie Schremp.

I did some research about Robbie before the draft. What I found out is that everyone who plays with Robbie likes playing with Robbie.(That doesn't sound like a bunch of guys pissed because their "superstar" isn't pulling his own weight.)

What I have heard is that Schremp had a "public disagreement" with Coach Hunter, and was likely insubordinate(And the circumstances are based on his will to win).

Hunter had two reasons for sitting Robbie Schremp.

You have to have control of your team.(which I agree with)

The other one has to do with having Eric Hunter and Logan Hunter on the team. There is the suggestion of nepotism but the team over the season played well, and you have to suggest that Coach Hunter knew what he was doing.

People have forgotten how hard that Tortorella ragged on Vinny Lecavalier. I am sure that most fans will forget this issue too.

The criticism of Robbie Schremp bothers me, because too many times you take a snippit of time or a single occassion in a player's career by which people such as yourself choose to define them.

After speaking to as many people as I have on the subject, the criticisms of Robbie Schremp are above non existant but are quite substantially exaggerated.

Unless something new comes to light, I expect Robbie Schremp to be a quality top 6 NHL player within the next 3-4 seasons.
 

Beukeboom Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
15,390
1,189
Chicago, IL
Visit site
Can everyone agree that the 25th overall pick has somewhere around a 25-30% chance of having a good NHL career? I define that as more than a 4th line forward or 6/7 d-man.

If Shremp reaches his potential - and no one knows if he will or not - he can be a 1st line forward. That would be a huge steal at that point in the draft. I think that RS will be motivated to prove all his detractors wrong, and showed up to camp in great shape. No one is questioning his skills, but his head/heart, and it seems like RS is off to a pretty good start.

If he is the arrogant headcase that many posters are making him out to be - he busts like 75% of the players do from that part of the draft.

It's a good gamble from the Oilers POV IMO. I'm not an expert on junior hockey by any stretch of the imagination, but I never read anything stating that RS was a bad teammate or complained about the lack of playing time in the P/O's.
 

db23

Guest
I have no personal vendetta. If you bother to look, the thread is supposed to be about how Shremp SHOULD HAVE GONE MUCH HIGHER in the draft. I'm saying, why?

I'm sure that Schremp will work on all of the weaker parts of his game as a pro. His attitude, his skating, his defence, whatever...But so will all of the 24 players taken ahead of him. Take a guy like Valabik for example. The coaches will get him to work on his skating, cut down on dumb penalties, he will fill out and acquire better co-ordination. Two years from now you have Scremp with a better attitude, better skating and some defensive conscience. But you also have Valabik at 6-7, 240 with better skating and body control. Chances are that the improved Valabik would still be a more desirable asset to a team than the improved Schremp.

You can't just assume that "your" player is going to work all of the kinks out of his game while the other drafted prospects remain the same. So you still have to find 15 or 20 of the players taken ahead of him, assume that they can address their respective weaknesses, and say that they won't be just as good in 2 or 3 years.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,014
11,020
Murica
X-SHARKIE said:
Agreed, Although I can't look down upon any Gm who passed him up. In fact when the Sharks moved up to 22, I didn't want them to take Robbie Schremp. I think Schremps attitude might serve him well down the road, but he does have some growing up to do, but I somewhat like his confidence and his approach to the game. I'm not worried about his size being a factor but only so many smaller guys who don't have good wheels seem to make it in the NHL these days. Sure you can point out the Adam Oates and the Mike Ricci's ect. but I think Schremp really fell because of his skating as well.

Still, simply put, Schremp at 25 in a average draft class was a steal.


He's not really all that small or a poor skater. I don't get those criticisms. He basically has Mark Recchi's size, build, and skating ability NOW. Give him a couple years and he'll probably be 6 feet tall and over 200 lbs. What's the problem?
 

windowlicker

Registered User
Jun 17, 2003
2,202
0
Murky Wisconsin
Visit site
db23 said:
I have no personal vendetta. If you bother to look, the thread is supposed to be about how Shremp SHOULD HAVE GONE MUCH HIGHER in the draft. I'm saying, why?

I'm sure that Schremp will work on all of the weaker parts of his game as a pro. His attitude, his skating, his defence, whatever...But so will all of the 24 players taken ahead of him. Take a guy like Valabik for example. The coaches will get him to work on his skating, cut down on dumb penalties, he will fill out and acquire better co-ordination. Two years from now you have Scremp with a better attitude, better skating and some defensive conscience. But you also have Valabik at 6-7, 240 with better skating and body control. Chances are that the improved Valabik would still be a more desirable asset to a team than the improved Schremp.

You can't just assume that "your" player is going to work all of the kinks out of his game while the other drafted prospects remain the same. So you still have to find 15 or 20 of the players taken ahead of him, assume that they can address their respective weaknesses, and say that they won't be just as good in 2 or 3 years.

Your right, from your comments you dont have a vendetta towards Schremp. Just a deep, personal animosity towards him. Or some sort of unhealthy fascination with the supposed off & on ice problems of a player who hasn't even played a single NHL game yet.

This thread was started in regards to Schremps availability at 25. You seem to think he's nothing special and the 25th draft position was warranted when it came to him. Many, many other posters seem to disagree with you. Dont take it personally.
 

Zine

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
11,954
1,772
Rostov-on-Don
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

Parise doesn't exhibit any of the above characteristics. Zach continuously pays a price going into corners, is in great shape (always going 100%) and has the heart of a lion.

If Schremp had Parise's heart, effort and level-headedness, he easily would have been picked #3.
 

Puckhead

Registered User
Jun 13, 2004
703
0
Behind you!!!
db23 said:
I have no personal vendetta. If you bother to look, the thread is supposed to be about how Shremp SHOULD HAVE GONE MUCH HIGHER in the draft. I'm saying, why?

I'm sure that Schremp will work on all of the weaker parts of his game as a pro. His attitude, his skating, his defence, whatever...But so will all of the 24 players taken ahead of him. Take a guy like Valabik for example. The coaches will get him to work on his skating, cut down on dumb penalties, he will fill out and acquire better co-ordination. Two years from now you have Scremp with a better attitude, better skating and some defensive conscience. But you also have Valabik at 6-7, 240 with better skating and body control. Chances are that the improved Valabik would still be a more desirable asset to a team than the improved Schremp.

You can't just assume that "your" player is going to work all of the kinks out of his game while the other drafted prospects remain the same. So you still have to find 15 or 20 of the players taken ahead of him, assume that they can address their respective weaknesses, and say that they won't be just as good in 2 or 3 years.


While I cannot sit here and tell any of you with any conviction that Schremp will become a great team guy, will learn the defensive side of the game, or will have a great attitude in the next 2-3 years. However, I think Valabik's issues will most definitely not be fixed in the same time frame. Schremp is very cocky...this is true, but he has the skill to back that up. Yes he needs to work on everything db23 mentioned earlier, but all things being equal, looking at what Valabik has to work on I would still take Robbie in a heart beat. Everyone makes the comparison to Chara. Other than size I don't see it! Furthermore if Chara had remained on the Island he would not have realized his offensive upside. So, it is not all within the players grasp to make an impact. If the team or the coach want to employ a system that does not fit with that players strengths than that player may suffer as a result.
 

db23

Guest
I just pulled Valabik out of the hat as one example of a player with some obvious strengths and some obvious weaknesses. You can take any of the guys taken ahead of Schremp and do the same thing. Kris Chucko is a big strong kid with some offensive skills who is off to college to mature into an all round winger. Zajac, the same, considered a "project" forward. Meszaros was considered a top 4 pick by one scouting agency. He is playing in a difficult league to get a handle on. Who knows how good he can be? Wojtek Wolski was selected the best pro prospect in the OHL ahead of Schremp. He was a First Team OHL All Star, and I don't think Robbie made any of the teams. Wolski is 6-3 and a better skater with a better shot, why should he have less upside? Kyle Chipchura was hurt for the last half of his draft year. He was rated the top N.A. prospect at mid season, half a dozen slots ahead of Schremp. Would he have been around at #18 if he was healthy all year? Not likely.

So on, so forth. Every one of the players this side of Ovechkin and Malkin is just a couple of assets short of the full load. The teams that drafted them think they can fill those holes. Even if Schremp deals with all of the "issues" surrounding his game, that is not to say that a lot of the other prospects won't do the same. Schremp's thing is to put up points, since he isn't particulary big, strong, fast, or defensively inclined. But averaging just over a point a game in the CHL in your draft year is no great shakes. Most forwards who do that (historically) end up being third line grinders at best.
 

topshelf331

Registered User
May 8, 2003
2,381
151
Stl
Visit site
pucks1 said:
I played a year of jr. A with him, that means i was with him day in and day out, u prob met him once. Im not a edm fan but i know Robbie is a great kid, and for u to even mention the kids family in that way shows how much class u have. It sounds like ur the one with the problem.

I was just weighing in on the discussion. Like I said I didnt want to offend anyone, thats why i didnt tell the story. Where did I say he wasnt a great kid. I thought I was wrather gentle. The only thing negative i said bout his family was that they were arrogant. And I dont think thats a newsflash to anyone on this board.
 

pucks1

Registered User
Apr 23, 2004
723
0
db23 said:
I have no personal vendetta. If you bother to look, the thread is supposed to be about how Shremp SHOULD HAVE GONE MUCH HIGHER in the draft. I'm saying, why?

I'm sure that Schremp will work on all of the weaker parts of his game as a pro. His attitude, his skating, his defence, whatever...But so will all of the 24 players taken ahead of him. Take a guy like Valabik for example. The coaches will get him to work on his skating, cut down on dumb penalties, he will fill out and acquire better co-ordination. Two years from now you have Scremp with a better attitude, better skating and some defensive conscience. But you also have Valabik at 6-7, 240 with better skating and body control. Chances are that the improved Valabik would still be a more desirable asset to a team than the improved Schremp.

You can't just assume that "your" player is going to work all of the kinks out of his game while the other drafted prospects remain the same. So you still have to find 15 or 20 of the players taken ahead of him, assume that they can address their respective weaknesses, and say that they won't be just as good in 2 or 3 years.
Well how do u know that in 2 years Rob wont be 6'1 or 6'2 220 with skills that will fake Valabik outa his skates?it can go either way.
 

little a from da bx

Registered User
Jun 18, 2004
375
0
Seachd said:
What are some examples of this attitude? He explained the trade demand, he's very confident, his teammates love him, and he lives and breathes hockey. I still haven't really seen incidents involving this massive attitude problem he supposedly has.
i have a guy in my union that played hockey with schremp, and he says the kid has an absolute horrible attitude. he said he is very cocky and a wise @ss. basically the kid thinks he is hot $h1t. we were talking about hockey and he bought schemp up out of know where saying he played with this kid and was awesome and should be a draft pick, 7 months later the name pops up i had class with him and brought him in some articles off hf boards, he said he wasnt shocked at all , the only thing that should hold him back was that attitude
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->