HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Prospects
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Prospects Discuss hockey prospects from all over the world and the NHL Draft.

Hockey's Future Fall 2004 Org Rankings 1-10

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-30-2004, 03:06 PM
  #51
MrMastodonFarm*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 6,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd
Marc Savard wouldn't be too bad (the Atlanta version, not the Calgary one.)
I hate to break it to you, but the versions aren't that much different. Savard is still a lavy me first player who listens to the backstreet boys.

The only difference right now is a better player hasn't come along to take his spot alongside Kovalchuk. When that happens, and as Atlanta improves Marc Savard will once again be moved to the side where he can sulk and be a top guy on another bottom feeder.

MrMastodonFarm* is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 03:09 PM
  #52
Holly Gunning
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: out and about
Posts: 3,486
vCash: 500
Savard does not play with Kovalchuk, he plays with Heatley's line.

Holly Gunning is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 03:16 PM
  #53
MrMastodonFarm*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 6,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HollyG
Savard does not play with Kovalchuk, he plays with Heatley's line.
So, same thing?

He also got a fair/large amount of PP time with him. My point stands, as Atlanta gets better and improves they will find a more complete player to replace Savard and he will be traded to another bottom feeder where he can be a big fish in a little pond again.

MrMastodonFarm* is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 03:16 PM
  #54
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
I hate to break it to you, but the versions aren't that much different. Savard is still a lavy me first player who listens to the backstreet boys.

The only difference right now is a better player hasn't come along to take his spot alongside Kovalchuk. When that happens, and as Atlanta improves Marc Savard will once again be moved to the side where he can sulk and be a top guy on another bottom feeder.
Well, obviously what I meant was a player who puts up over a point a game. If his linemates help that out, so much the better.

Seachd is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 04:04 PM
  #55
Flamin C Arena
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd
But his potential's higher than that, and even if he doesn't hit it, Marc Savard wouldn't be too bad (the Atlanta version, not the Calgary one.)
First off, what exactly makes his potential more than Marc Savard. In fact, I would say that is probably the best you could hope for. What exactly does Schremp do that Savard doesn't? I have seen nothing that shows that. The guy was benched by his OHL club in the 7th game of the playoffs. That says a lot about the guy and what kind of hockey player he is. Sounds exactly like a #1 center to me....give him a 9.

Flamin C Arena is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 04:55 PM
  #56
se7en*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,737
vCash: 500
Let's just cut to the chase here; you don't think Schremp has any potential because you are just another Flamer reitering his non-existant 'attitude problems' as the reason why. It's just that simple!

Here's an article from Guy, who actually interviewed Schremp, and actually knows quite a bit about him.

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/article...readed&order=0

Of particular interest to you are;

Quote:
Some journalists and even some scouts have labeled Schremp as being a selfish player who puts himself ahead of his team. That’s a description that the Oilers have found to be anything but the truth.

“Believe me, that’s something we explored a lot. We interviewed a couple of his teammates and they never said anything bad about him and even after London’s game seven, Robbie never said anything bad about the coaches or anybody either,” Prendergast outlined referring to a situation where Schremp was benched during the London Knights’ playoff Game 7 loss.

The much-publicized incident from last spring created a lot of ripples around hockey circles. President and Head Coach Dale Hunter chose not to play Schremp, fourth in team scoring, in the vital Game 7 until the third period and even then primarily on power plays. A puzzling decision but even now Schremp holds no ill feelings towards the coach or his strategy and won’t say a bad word even when given the chance
.
If you think Schremp will be a bust, fine. It's not my job to change the minds of the uninformed. But don't preach that the Oilers prospects will bust - as if fact - simply because you hate them.

It's also known his agent demanded his trade. He wa spassed because of supposed attitude problems - and Edmonton cashed in bigtime!

se7en* is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 04:58 PM
  #57
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,119
vCash: 500
Yeah, I have to admit, I don't see Schremp as a better version of Marc Savard. Yeah, it's possible, but I don't think Schremp is quite that talented. He's very creative and has great puck skills, but it's not like he has some unlimited talent pool. I don't see so much more in him than, say, Brad Boyes had in the OHL.

Mizral is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 05:42 PM
  #58
USC Trojans
I have a plan.
 
USC Trojans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LA Oiler fan
Posts: 11,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmokeyClause
At worst, wouldn't he be out of the league? If he was at best a great number 1 and at worst a second liner, I think he would have been taken a lot higher. He's probably a 9D. He could be a great center, but he's just as likely to be out of the league.
I was merely explaining what Schremp's 9C rating means, since the Flames guy seemed kinda new to the boards.

And your evaluation of Schremp could apply to any prospect in the league. I'm sure every forward at best could be a great 1st liner and at worst could never step foot in the NHL. You're using both ends of the spectrum here. I think whoever named Dan Cleary hit the spot. I think with talent like that, you WILL get a shot in the NHL. Its just a matter of what you do with that opportunity. Schremp IMO, will get to play in the NHL. Whether he becomes an Ilya Kovalchuk or a Dan Cleary, it is up to him.

USC Trojans is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 05:51 PM
  #59
Flamin C Arena
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by USC Trojans
I was merely explaining what Schremp's 9C rating means, since the Flames guy seemed kinda new to the boards.

And your evaluation of Schremp could apply to any prospect in the league. I'm sure every forward at best could be a great 1st liner and at worst could never step foot in the NHL. You're using both ends of the spectrum here. I think whoever named Dan Cleary hit the spot. I think with talent like that, you WILL get a shot in the NHL. Its just a matter of what you do with that opportunity. Schremp IMO, will get to play in the NHL. Whether he becomes an Ilya Kovalchuk or a Dan Cleary, it is up to him.
I am not saying Schremp is going to be a bust...quite the contrary actually. I just think that a 9 rating is way over this guys head. Here is what I believe a 9 means:

"Elite forward / defenseman / goaltender -- possesses the potential for greatness, a likely Hall of Fame candidate once his playing days are over. Think Mark Messier, Guy Lafleur, Niklas Lidstrom, Denis Potvin, Patrick Roy, Martin Brodeur - definite Hall of Fame players that displayed great talent early on."

No where in this guys career has he shown anything remotely close to make me believe he is going to be a great player. He barely improved over his rookie season. He just doesn't have the tools. To me a 9 player should be making scouts drool. To me he has solid 7 potential and I could see some people argue he could be an 8. Lets say a 7.5C. Sounds much more reasonable to me.

Furthermore Ovechkin and Malkin were seen as clearly head and shoulders above the rest of the draft class (although I would argue that Barker is a pretty good #3 pick), but somehow Malkin only gets an 8.5 and Schremp is a #9. I'd take Malkin's toolbox over Schremp's any day of the week.

I'm don't want to make too big of a stir here...pretty new and really appreciate all the content and effort that is put into this site. Just sort of tired of the Schremp hype...probably cause I live too close to Edmonton.


Last edited by Flamin C Arena: 09-30-2004 at 06:00 PM.
Flamin C Arena is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 06:25 PM
  #60
s7ark
LeonTheProfessional
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Thompson
Yeah, I have to admit, I don't see Schremp as a better version of Marc Savard. Yeah, it's possible, but I don't think Schremp is quite that talented. He's very creative and has great puck skills, but it's not like he has some unlimited talent pool. I don't see so much more in him than, say, Brad Boyes had in the OHL.

LOL, wow, what a difference a year makes. This time last year everyone had him in their top 5 lists and you Miz were raving about his play. But I guess now that he has been drafted by Edmonton he just isn't all he's cracked up to be. Strange how that seems to happen, huh?

Face it, this kid is a player. he was a first overall pick in the OHL and rookie of the year. He was in a stickhandling video with Gretz as a kid and is definitely in the same league as Malkin offensively. If Malkin deserves an 8.5 then I will stand up for Guy and defend his choice of 9C. Malkin is better defensively though...

True, Schremp's defensive game and extreme confidence made him drop in the draft but no one in Edmonton cares about that. We were looking for a top line player and we think we have him. He has played 2 games and has 5 points. And including preseason he has 10 points in 4 games. He is off to a great start and I am at least pretty excited about him..

s7ark is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 06:32 PM
  #61
USC Trojans
I have a plan.
 
USC Trojans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LA Oiler fan
Posts: 11,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamin C Arena
But that is my whole point. He doesn't have superstar potential. At best he is going to be a Marc Savard at the NHL level. That's his potential. He doesn't have the tools to be an elite player in the NHL.
I know a lot of Flames fans who were really disappointed that you selected Chucko and not Schremp. He is exactly what the doctor ordered for the Oilers. We've been lacking a high risk high reward pick who can potentially be a marquee player for the Oilers and our prospect depth is finally deep enough to make such a gamble. And from your comments it sounds like you are either Miss Cleo or a bitter Flames fan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamin C Arena
If this guy really had superstar potential, a lot of teams would have happily taken him even if he did have attitude problems. I think what happened was that he was a hyped junior and got scouted a lot coming up to the draft.
Yes he was hyped as a junior. You have to have skills in order to be hyped. Its not like the media randomly picks a name out of the hat to see who they will hype this year. Have you seen what he can do (ie. the Don Cherry game)? That kid has skills and he is being hyped rightfully so.

I also think you're misinterpreting the word potential. If there is anything I've learned on these boards, its that potential is just a word. Having superstar potential doesn't mean he will become a superstar. Its a crapshoot. Some of the other NHL teams didn't want to pick Schremp because they don't think it is worth the gamble. However, it doesn't mean that he won't become a superstar. The Oilers have enough depth to make that gamble and that is what they did. The reason Schremp fell to the Oiler's hands isn't because he will never become a superstar, its just that the other teams can't afford the gamble. The same applies for all prospects. Its just a matter of making the safer pick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamin C Arena
Scouts realized he just wasn't that good (similar to Dan Cleary) and his game doesn't translate very well to the NHL game. Sure he can dangle with the puck, but there are a lot more areas of the game that are more important especially the way the game is played now a days.
Are you an NHL scout? Do you have close connections with NHL scouts? How do you know this? I mean, c'mon...we barely drafted him 3 months ago and you're already saying that his game will never translate to the NHL, that he has no potential blah blah blah. I bet you that had Schremp fell to the 2nd round, where the risk is considerably lower, all the teams would want to select him.

USC Trojans is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 06:41 PM
  #62
USC Trojans
I have a plan.
 
USC Trojans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LA Oiler fan
Posts: 11,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamin C Arena
I'm don't want to make too big of a stir here...pretty new and really appreciate all the content and effort that is put into this site. Just sort of tired of the Schremp hype...probably cause I live too close to Edmonton.
Apparently not close enough... No no, you're not making a stir, we're having a good argument here. If you have concerns on Schremp's 9C rating, then I guess its best if you talk to some of the Oiler's writers. Guy Flaming has seen him and talked to him several times so he has a better idea of what kind of player/person he is.

(sorry Guy! )

USC Trojans is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 06:42 PM
  #63
Cerebral
Registered User
 
Cerebral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by USC Trojans
Apparently not close enough... No no, you're not making a stir, we're having a good argument here. If you have concerns on Schremp's 9C rating, then I guess its best if you talk to some of the Oiler's writers. Guy Flaming has seen him and talked to him several times so he has a better idea of what kind of player/person he is.

(sorry Guy! )
Way to drag poor Guy into it...

Cerebral is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 06:46 PM
  #64
Flamin C Arena
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 5
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark
Face it, this kid is a player. he was a first overall pick in the OHL and rookie of the year. He was in a stickhandling video with Gretz as a kid and is definitely in the same league as Malkin offensively. If Malkin deserves an 8.5 then I will stand up for Guy and defend his choice of 9C. Malkin is better defensively though...
Ok, so Malkin goes out last year and wins rookie of the year honours in the Russian Elite league (playing against men) and Schremp pretty much duplicated his rookie season and you think Schremp should be rated higher than Malkin. Malkin is in a different league then Schremp. Every scout would admit that. Oh wait...Schremp was in a video with Gretz...should have given him a 10 then

Flamin C Arena is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 06:47 PM
  #65
USC Trojans
I have a plan.
 
USC Trojans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LA Oiler fan
Posts: 11,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cerebral
Way to drag poor Guy into it...

He can come kill me if he wants.

USC Trojans is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 06:58 PM
  #66
Cerebral
Registered User
 
Cerebral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamin C Arena
Ok, so Malkin goes out last year and wins rookie of the year honours in the Russian Elite league (playing against men) and Schremp pretty much duplicated his rookie season and you think Schremp should be rated higher than Malkin. Malkin is in a different league then Schremp. Every scout would admit that. Oh wait...Schremp was in a video with Gretz...should have given him a 10 then
Most people feel that Schremp's potential offensive production (I stress potential) is about the same or just a notch below Malkin's. It was mentioned many times at the draft that Schremp was possibly the third most offensively gifted player available that day. The big difference between the two is that Malkin is a big two-way centerman that appears to have a very large physical and defensive edge on Schremp. Likewise, Malkin is a heck of a lot more likely to reach his potential than Schremp is.

Cerebral is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 06:59 PM
  #67
s7ark
LeonTheProfessional
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamin C Arena
Ok, so Malkin goes out last year and wins rookie of the year honours in the Russian Elite league (playing against men) and Schremp pretty much duplicated his rookie season and you think Schremp should be rated higher than Malkin. Malkin is in a different league then Schremp. Every scout would admit that. Oh wait...Schremp was in a video with Gretz...should have given him a 10 then

Yes great call. You are disagreeing with almost every scout in the NHL. All of them had the offensive capabilities of Malkin and Schremp as 2 and 3 in the draft. And given that Malkin would have been a number 1 in any other draft, that puts Schremp's offense in the same league as a top 1 or 2 pick in a draft. He dropped not through any fault of his offensive abilities. The reason he went at all in the first roud was due to his exceptionally high talent. Schremp is fully aware that his last year wasn't his best and he knows the mistakes he made. This kid is driven to make the NHL. Read Guy's interview if need confirmation from that directly from his mouth. Watch for a better season from him this year. Baring injury of course...

But I guess you know more then any of them...

Sorry if I seem short, but I didn't appreciate your snide response.

s7ark is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 07:05 PM
  #68
BlindWillyMcHurt
Registered User
 
BlindWillyMcHurt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 6,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Ok, so Malkin goes out last year and wins rookie of the year honours in the Russian Elite league (playing against men) and Schremp pretty much duplicated his rookie season and you think Schremp should be rated higher than Malkin.
Well, technically, given HFs new prospect ranking system, Malkin is rated better at 8.5B as opposed to 9C. I was a little surprised at Schremp's 9 potential rating too, mostly because I don't much care for him as a prospect (we won't get into that though). It just seems odd that they gave him a better upside than a prospect that some say (not me) has a higher ceiling than Ovechkin.

But once I thought about it, I realized it was just a bunch of subjective numbers and immediatly stopped caring. The real test will be on NHL ice - whenever that is.

Great job, by the way, on the new organizational ranking HF. I enjoyed the analysis of each teams talent pool and appriciate the time and effort put into it. Huzzah!

BlindWillyMcHurt is online now  
Old
09-30-2004, 07:10 PM
  #69
Cerebral
Registered User
 
Cerebral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlindWillyMcHurt
Well, technically, given HFs new prospect ranking system, Malkin is rated better at 8.5B as opposed to 9C. I was a little surprised at Schremp's 9 potential rating too, mostly because I don't much care for him as a prospect (we won't get into that though). It just seems odd that they gave him a better upside than a prospect that some say (not me) has a higher ceiling than Ovechkin.

But once I thought about it, I realized it was just a bunch of subjective numbers and immediatly stopped caring. The real test will be on NHL ice - whenever that is.

Great job, by the way, on the new organizational ranking HF. I enjoyed the analysis of each teams talent pool and appriciate the time and effort put into it. Huzzah!
Everyone keeps mentioning Malkin's 8.5B like it is the benchmark for ratings. Might it be possible that his rating is lower than it could be? In any event, these ratings are fairly subjective and no one will have any clue how accurate they are until the players have a few seasons under their belts. I'm happy with Schremp's progress so far as an Oilers fan and I hope for the best...

Cerebral is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 07:26 PM
  #70
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chattanooga TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,508
vCash: 500
I think Schremp underlies the problem with the prospect rating system. He comes into the draft with one of the top 5 skillsets with guys like Ovechkin, Malkin, Radulov (the big 3 from Russia), Schremp, and heck...maybe Denis Parshin, yet at the same time....he is drafted lower than the 3 Russians and exceeds Parshin who has obvious size problems that he needs to overcome. So anyways, lets break things down -

Alexander Ovechkin - 9A

Evgeny Malkin - 8.5 B

Alexander Radulov - 7.5 C

Denis Parshin - 8D

Robbie Schremp - 9 C

Those are the 5 players, largely considered the most taleneted skill wise in the draft and their respective ratings. Look at them, and see the disparity...Alexander Radulov is a 7.5 C, yet is considered jsut as deadly, if not more so, then Schremp and he came into the draft with a much better attitude description/coachability. Malkin and Ovechkin were always considered to be on a different plane than the others....Parshin has 1st line potential but he is going to have a heck of a time reaching it, thus the D slot. Then we have Rob Schremp rated at a 9 (elite/HOFer/...draws comparison to Mark Messier, etc.). Are you kidding me? This is a guy that has a tremendous problem with his attitude and from all apearances is very difficult to coach. You can point to his boom/bust potential as a reason for his high ranking, but even then IF everything goes correctly - he is a first liner at best (i.e. an 8). Are you telling me that this kid who demands a trade from his team, is sat in game 7 of the playoffs for his defensive defeciences/inability to do what the coach wants, is going to be a superstar in this league? There are reasons he fell so far in the draft, and having him rated considerably higher than even those with the same skill/set as him does not make sense to me, at all.

I guess what I'm trying to say here is this - if you are giving out the numerical rating based solely on potential....then you need to either incorporate a players weaknesses in it to balance it out (i.e. what happened with Radulov - 7.5) or not at all (i.e. Schremp at 9 with the same talent set). The letter rankings should be a separate extension of that giving a relative idea on how likely a player is to succeed to the fullest. A player's potential can be hindered by his attitude, his coachability, his mental game, and other glaring holes in his game such as skating, etc. This should not be just something taken into consideration with just the letter grade, but his overall potential. After all, how can you potentially be Mark Messier if you can't skate, or are being benched in the most important part of the entire season...Game 7 of the playoffs because you can't play defense or do what the coach wants. You can't be...These guys were special b/c they were on the ice when it counted the most and were relied upon heavily, and if you have a glaring problem there...it should affect your potential rating numerically AND alphabettically....not just the latter.

For the record, I'm not a Schremp basher/lover. I didn't want the Preds to choose him simply for the fact that he has had a large problem in the defensive zone in the past, and with our coaches....his talent would be buried (much like Legwands was) until he learned to play defense. Take that into consideration with his supposed attitude problems, and that just spells trouble for a close knit, defensive oriented team that has their centers relied upon for offense last on the team behind wingers AND defensemen.

Final thing - Despite my huge speal on this rating system, it is vastly improved over what it has been in the past. However, the point of my post is to point out the inconcistencies with the ratings. They are there to give you an idea of what the player can accomplish, not as a benchmark to compare two teams. The fact of the matter is, these lists are made up by individuals, some of whom are slightly biased, each with their own preferences on how to rate a player. Things WILL be different because of this, and for that reason when you come up in a debate on who is better, etc....You need a little bit more than just "Hey mines a 9C and yours is a 7.5 C" because in some cases, they could have exactly the same potential....and the discrepancy is not due to talent, rather just the writers choice/subjectivity.

__________________
- Enoch -
Enoch is online now  
Old
09-30-2004, 07:26 PM
  #71
BlindWillyMcHurt
Registered User
 
BlindWillyMcHurt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 6,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Everyone keeps mentioning Malkin's 8.5B like it is the benchmark for ratings. Might it be possible that his rating is lower than it could be?
Nah, I just brought up Malkin because he was already used in this discussion. I'm a Pens fan, and I think the 8.5B rating is pretty good, as far as ratings go.

I think USC already stated the best point, the Oilers have a deep prospect pool, especially at forward (including a few "safe" picks), and they chose to swing for the fences in a "boom or bust" type like Schremp. I actually admire that type of drafting mentality on occasion (which is why I was happy with many of the Penguin's picks this year).

In that regard, it was a very good pick for the Oilers, no doubt.


Last edited by BlindWillyMcHurt: 09-30-2004 at 07:31 PM.
BlindWillyMcHurt is online now  
Old
09-30-2004, 07:34 PM
  #72
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch
A player's potential can be hindered by his attitude, his coachability, his mental game, and other glaring holes in his game such as skating, etc. This should not be just something taken into consideration with just the letter grade, but his overall potential. After all, how can you potentially be Mark Messier if you can't skate, or are being benched in the most important part of the entire season...Game 7 of the playoffs because you can't play defense or do what the coach wants. You can't be
I read your whole post, but I don't have time to go through the whole thing. But this part struck me the most.

Schremp doesn't have problems with skating, and I'm not sure how that all started. His attitude seems fine - his dedication and willingness to improve is fantastic. Keep in mind he was benched for two periods. How should that affect his coachability (or his rating, for that matter)?

Seachd is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 07:48 PM
  #73
Enoch
This is my boomstick
 
Enoch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chattanooga TN
Country: United States
Posts: 12,508
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd
I read your whole post, but I don't have time to go through the whole thing. But this part struck me the most.

Schremp doesn't have problems with skating
I never said he did. I was using it as a general example, and if you don't feel that Schremp had/has any problems. More power to you. My goal was not to slander him in the first place, merely pointing out how the bar for judging a player should not be HF rankings alone. I used an example I thought held weight as coming into and even after the draft so far, those 5 players were largely heralded as the 5 most talented players in the draft.


Last edited by Enoch: 09-30-2004 at 08:02 PM.
Enoch is online now  
Old
09-30-2004, 07:55 PM
  #74
Hemskyfanboy83
Registered User
 
Hemskyfanboy83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 6,467
vCash: 500
most of the people are just jealous. Before the draft everybody was saying he was right next to malkin Offensivly. He goes to edmonton at 25 now he won't even be a number 1 center. Who is to say he won't be a hall of famer. He got drafted higher then messier did. I am sure if anyone said the messier was gonna be a hall of famer when he got drafted they would be eaten alive. Now i am not saying schremp will be one because thre is a 99 percent chance he won't but i do see him as a #1 center. He has great potential, that does not mean he will reach it, potential wise he was definatly top 5 in the draft but teams went with the safer picks that have better chances of playing in the nhl

Hemskyfanboy83 is offline  
Old
09-30-2004, 08:00 PM
  #75
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s7ark
LOL, wow, what a difference a year makes. This time last year everyone had him in their top 5 lists and you Miz were raving about his play. But I guess now that he has been drafted by Edmonton he just isn't all he's cracked up to be. Strange how that seems to happen, huh?

Face it, this kid is a player. he was a first overall pick in the OHL and rookie of the year. He was in a stickhandling video with Gretz as a kid and is definitely in the same league as Malkin offensively. If Malkin deserves an 8.5 then I will stand up for Guy and defend his choice of 9C. Malkin is better defensively though...

True, Schremp's defensive game and extreme confidence made him drop in the draft but no one in Edmonton cares about that. We were looking for a top line player and we think we have him. He has played 2 games and has 5 points. And including preseason he has 10 points in 4 games. He is off to a great start and I am at least pretty excited about him..
Hey, who said I didn't like him? I do, I think he'll be an NHL player for sure. However, I don't Doug Weight is a fair comparison either. Maybe a Marc Savard type player, I think he's got that kind of potential which when you think about it is pretty great.

Schremp comparable to Malkin's offensive game? Maybe, but Malkin is about 4 inches taller and in general a lot bigger, which will help him put up more points in the NHL likely.

Mizral is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:38 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.