HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Prospects
Notices

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

Bob Mackenzie on Robbie Schremp/Team USA

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-09-2004, 11:23 PM
  #26
cagney
cdojdmccjajgejncjaba
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 3,562
vCash: 500
I really think Schremp will be on the final roster. If you look at the preliminary roster it is mostly guys who were there last year or had strong showings at the summer tryouts. A lot of good players haven't been named yet, including AJ Thelen who was picked higher than Schremp in the draft and played for the NTDP. Why no questions about him?

The two '87s looking to make the team are bigger question marks to me. It takes a lot to be successful as a 17 year old in a 19 year old's tournament. I think Johnson and Kessel can contribute though.

Centers will have to be moved to wing. Which centers can play on the wing? Pineault is a natural center but can play wing. Who else? Fritsche? Hensick?

I'm also curious if they'll go with 8 defensemen like last year.

cagney is offline  
Old
11-09-2004, 11:31 PM
  #27
Postman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 4,917
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Postman Send a message via MSN to Postman
Quote:
Originally Posted by cagney
A lot of good players haven't been named yet, including AJ Thelen who was picked higher than Schremp in the draft and played for the NTDP. Why no questions about him?
Because he doesn't have the history Schremp does.

A lot of people think he was snubbed last year. That, along with the prior history he has with USA Hockey is cause for concern, IMO.

Postman is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 12:02 AM
  #28
Rabid Ranger
Imperiled Knight
 
Rabid Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: The Abyss
Country: United States
Posts: 19,326
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cagney
I really think Schremp will be on the final roster. If you look at the preliminary roster it is mostly guys who were there last year or had strong showings at the summer tryouts. A lot of good players haven't been named yet, including AJ Thelen who was picked higher than Schremp in the draft and played for the NTDP. Why no questions about him?

The two '87s looking to make the team are bigger question marks to me. It takes a lot to be successful as a 17 year old in a 19 year old's tournament. I think Johnson and Kessel can contribute though.

Centers will have to be moved to wing. Which centers can play on the wing? Pineault is a natural center but can play wing. Who else? Fritsche? Hensick?

I'm also curious if they'll go with 8 defensemen like last year.


I think he'll be named as well, mainly because they won't be able to help themselves as Schremp is that kind of game breaking offensive talent. As for the number of defensemen, they might go with eight as the lone returning "workhorse" is Ryan Suter. Hunwick and Likens are nice players, but not in that class. I'd like to see Thelen, Johnson, Nickerson, and Lashoff named, I guess we'll see. One guy who is throwing his own name out there is Frank Rediker, although I don't know if he's even on the radar.


Last edited by Rabid Ranger: 11-10-2004 at 08:11 AM.
Rabid Ranger is online now  
Old
11-10-2004, 12:05 AM
  #29
cagney
cdojdmccjajgejncjaba
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 3,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postman
Because he doesn't have the history Schremp does.

A lot of people think he was snubbed last year. That, along with the prior history he has with USA Hockey is cause for concern, IMO.
I realise that is the reason why people are concerned. In fact, I am one of the people who thinks Schremp was snubbed last year. It was a calculated risk and the USA Hockey suits were fortunate enough that they ended up not needing him.

The point of my rhetorical question re:Thelen was really to back up my belief that this concern is unfounded. For USA Hockey to leave him off the roster this year because of last years controversey would be spiteful beyond belief. At this point, Schremp would just be too much of an asset to leave off the team over something so petty. None of Schremp's "issues" effect his teams on ice performance either so that's not an excuse.

I'll be shocked and dissapointed if Schremp isn't on the roster come December.

cagney is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 12:12 AM
  #30
Postman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 4,917
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Postman Send a message via MSN to Postman
Quote:
Originally Posted by cagney
I realise that is the reason why people are concerned. In fact, I am one of the people who thinks Schremp was snubbed last year. It was a calculated risk and the USA Hockey suits were fortunate enough that they ended up not needing him.
I figured you did, I was just stating the obvious. I also was one of the people who thinks he was snubbed last year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cagney
The point of my rhetorical question re:Thelen was really to back up my belief that this concern is unfounded. For USA Hockey to leave him off the roster this year because of last years controversey would be spiteful beyond belief. At this point, Schremp would just be too much of an asset to leave off the team over something so petty. None of Schremp's "issues" effect his teams on ice performance either so that's not an excuse.

I'll be shocked and dissapointed if Schremp isn't on the roster come December.
I think a lot of people just assume that because there have been many political decisions by USA hockey in the past. Not just with the U-20 team.

And I know you realize this as well. I just disagree that the concern is unfounded.

Postman is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 12:14 AM
  #31
cagney
cdojdmccjajgejncjaba
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 3,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabid Ranger
As for the number of defensemen, they might go with eight as the lone returning "workhorse" is Ryan Suter. Hunwick and Likens are nice players, but not in that class. I'd like to see Thelen, Johnson, Nickerson, and Lashoff named, I guess we'll see. One guy who was throwing his own name out there os Frank Rediker, although I don't know if he's even on the radar.
I'm not too thrilled with the idea of Nickerson being there. He's big and mean but I don't think that he'll be steady enough for this level.

Alex Goligoski is a player I wouldn't mind seeing on the roster. He's raw but could be a standout.

I haven't seen much of Grant Lewis but he intrigues me.

cagney is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 12:17 AM
  #32
Postman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 4,917
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Postman Send a message via MSN to Postman
Quote:
Originally Posted by cagney
I'm not too thrilled with the idea of Nickerson being there. He's big and mean but I don't think that he'll be steady enough for this level.
I definitely like the idea of him being there.

I think he'd be better suited than Hunwick or Likens (not a big fan of either). While not as steady, I love his package of nastiness and mobility/skating. He really impressed me at the evaluation camp.

Postman is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 12:28 AM
  #33
japanman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Back in Edmonton Yo!
Country: Canada
Posts: 124
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to japanman
good on Robbie!

This article was posted on the oilers site last week, http://slam.canoe.ca/slam/hockey/ju.../05/701920.html
I really think this kids going to be an NHL star and I hope he gets on team USA.

japanman is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 12:35 AM
  #34
cagney
cdojdmccjajgejncjaba
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 3,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postman
And I know you realize this as well. I just disagree that the concern is unfounded.
Unfounded is probably too strong a word. I just think it's being overblown.

cagney is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 01:02 AM
  #35
D.Legwand
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 94
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilers Chick
...and what do you basis this on? Have you actually SEEN the other eligible players yourself that play in the NCAA, USNTDP or any of the various American junior/prep leagues?

I'm not saying nor implying that Schremp won't/doesn't have a chance to make the team, but there are many other very good Americans who also have a shot at making the team.

not better then schremp. name me one college, usndt, or us junior leage player eligible player that has more skill then Robbie? if kessel or blake wheeler make the team over schremp, it will be a total sham job. last year usa hockey acted like he didn't even exist, and yes he should have been on the team last year as a 17 year old. because he shunned the usndt, went and played major junior, he gets treated like this. makes sense to me.

D.Legwand is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 07:57 AM
  #36
Dr.Sens(e)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 6,158
vCash: 500
I too saw MacKenzie's spot, and there are a couple of points to add and consider...

- Schremp was aweful at the US development camp. This was not the first time Schremp laid an egg in front of the US brass, and US coaches didn't like his attitude when he was there. Even Edmonton scouts went on record about how poorly Schremp played there.

- the top two centermen will be O'Sullivan and Fritsche, both of whom played key rolls on the gold medal winning team last year.

- Schremp is tearing it up on the powerplay with London this season, and there is no question that his hands and skills bring a lot to the table in the offensive zone. But if he isn't going to be on the first powerplay unit, it could certainly be argued that he isn't of AS MUCH value to the team.

- After all this, the US brass are going to London to watch Schremp over the next couple of weeks to get a better update on his play. It seems they are going out of their way to give him another look. Let's face it, they can't give him a job based simply on looking at the OHL scoring leaders - they will base their decision on other factors, including how they see him play. There are four London guys on the top scorers list after all, as the Knights are the highest scoring team in junior hockey.

It's still a reasonable argument to say he should be on the team, but let's get over this stuff about the US brass being idiots. Perhaps their gold medal win last year without Schremp should buy them a bit of slack.

Dr.Sens(e) is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 08:14 AM
  #37
Rabid Ranger
Imperiled Knight
 
Rabid Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: The Abyss
Country: United States
Posts: 19,326
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Sens(e)
I too saw MacKenzie's spot, and there are a couple of points to add and consider...

- Schremp was aweful at the US development camp. This was not the first time Schremp laid an egg in front of the US brass, and US coaches didn't like his attitude when he was there. Even Edmonton scouts went on record about how poorly Schremp played there.

- the top two centermen will be O'Sullivan and Fritsche, both of whom played key rolls on the gold medal winning team last year.

- Schremp is tearing it up on the powerplay with London this season, and there is no question that his hands and skills bring a lot to the table in the offensive zone. But if he isn't going to be on the first powerplay unit, it could certainly be argued that he isn't of AS MUCH value to the team.

- After all this, the US brass are going to London to watch Schremp over the next couple of weeks to get a better update on his play. It seems they are going out of their way to give him another look. Let's face it, they can't give him a job based simply on looking at the OHL scoring leaders - they will base their decision on other factors, including how they see him play. There are four London guys on the top scorers list after all, as the Knights are the highest scoring team in junior hockey.

It's still a reasonable argument to say he should be on the team, but let's get over this stuff about the US brass being idiots. Perhaps their gold medal win last year without Schremp should buy them a bit of slack.

Great points. Nothing more reallly needs to be added. I think the U.S. brass going to London to watch him is a great sign that he is not only on the radar, but is being considered.


Last edited by Rabid Ranger: 11-10-2004 at 10:39 AM.
Rabid Ranger is online now  
Old
11-10-2004, 08:17 AM
  #38
Rabid Ranger
Imperiled Knight
 
Rabid Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: The Abyss
Country: United States
Posts: 19,326
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by D.Legwand
not better then schremp. name me one college, usndt, or us junior leage player eligible player that has more skill then Robbie? if kessel or blake wheeler make the team over schremp, it will be a total sham job. last year usa hockey acted like he didn't even exist, and yes he should have been on the team last year as a 17 year old. because he shunned the usndt, went and played major junior, he gets treated like this. makes sense to me.

First of all, Schremp's skill isn't in question. He's not only one of the most skilled American prospects, but prospects in general. Schremp is having to overcome questions about his overall game and attitude. If he can satisfy the U.S. management team that those concerns are not serious, and he will be a contributer to the team concept, he'll be named. Otherwise, there are several other players that can fill his role, and yes, Phil Kessel is at least as skilled, and maybe more so than Schremp. As for Schremp getting "snubbed" last year, he was on the radar, and probably would have been named except for his theatrics with the USNTDP team. That cost him IMO.


Last edited by Rabid Ranger: 11-10-2004 at 10:40 AM.
Rabid Ranger is online now  
Old
11-10-2004, 08:20 AM
  #39
Rabid Ranger
Imperiled Knight
 
Rabid Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: The Abyss
Country: United States
Posts: 19,326
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cagney
I'm not too thrilled with the idea of Nickerson being there. He's big and mean but I don't think that he'll be steady enough for this level.

Alex Goligoski is a player I wouldn't mind seeing on the roster. He's raw but could be a standout.

I haven't seen much of Grant Lewis but he intrigues me.

I think the team needs some size and nastiness on the blueline, and Nickerson would fit that role perfectly. Lewis is big, but not really a banger, and while Goligoski is fiesty, he's average sized.


Last edited by Rabid Ranger: 11-10-2004 at 10:40 AM.
Rabid Ranger is online now  
Old
11-10-2004, 08:34 AM
  #40
pucks1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 714
vCash: 500
Let's say Schremp was from Canada, do you think he would crack their line up?

pucks1 is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 08:50 AM
  #41
trahans99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Home of the 2005 Memorial Cup
Posts: 1,443
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pucks1
Let's say Schremp was from Canada, do you think he would crack their line up?

In any other year yes, but this year Canada is so deep that he wouldn't be on the top 2 lines so they wouldn't use him on the 3rd or 4th line.... so in short NO .....

This is the same questoin about Corey Perry of the Knights (Schremps teamate)

trahans99 is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 08:54 AM
  #42
FREE DENTAL CARE
Registered User
 
FREE DENTAL CARE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 202
vCash: 500
"Rob" is NOT a "Good Guy". The people selecting the team probably are worried about his negative impact.

FREE DENTAL CARE is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 09:00 AM
  #43
pucks1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FREE DENTAL CARE
"Rob" is NOT a "Good Guy". The people selecting the team probably are worried about his negative impact.
I think its funny when people post this, I was his teammate in syracuse 2 years ago, never had a problem with him and i still talk to him Occasionally online. He a good kid.

pucks1 is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 09:51 AM
  #44
Oiltalk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FREE DENTAL CARE
"Rob" is NOT a "Good Guy". The people selecting the team probably are worried about his negative impact.
What is your definition of "Good Guy"? While your at it tell us what makes him so bad.

Oiltalk is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 10:04 AM
  #45
Dr.Sens(e)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 6,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oiltalk
What is your definition of "Good Guy"? While your at it tell us what makes him so bad.
I don't think this is what matters, as I think his point was simply that the USNTP camp see Schremp as a 'potential' problem in terms of his attitude and team chemistry. Whether this is fair or not, is up for debate, but certainly there were a few NHL teams who felt the same way.

But hey, a bunch of teams passed on Jeff Friesen for the same reasons, and a few years later, the concerns were seemingly unfounded. I think the concerns over Schremp have been a bit more telling, but that might just be the media. Kids are kids, the trick is trying to figure out which ones will grow out of it.

Dr.Sens(e) is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 10:07 AM
  #46
pucks1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oiltalk
What is your definition of "Good Guy"? While your at it tell us what makes him so bad.
Well the first time I steped onto the ice for our first prac, he was the 1rst one to skate up and introduce himself to me. He would be the first one on and last one of the rink. After games he would give sticks to kids. Ya he was kind of cocky, i asked him if he was going to play in the big show and he said i have the contract in my back pocket and winked at me. But he backed it up. And he does curse alot and sometime infront of adults but so did the rest of our team. Over all he was a good person/teamate. Even though his mouth sometimes gets him in trouble.

pucks1 is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 10:18 AM
  #47
Sammy*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr.Sens(e)
I too saw MacKenzie's spot, and there are a couple of points to add and consider...

- Schremp was aweful at the US development camp. This was not the first time Schremp laid an egg in front of the US brass, and US coaches didn't like his attitude when he was there. Even Edmonton scouts went on record about how poorly Schremp played there.

- the top two centermen will be O'Sullivan and Fritsche, both of whom played key rolls on the gold medal winning team last year.

- Schremp is tearing it up on the powerplay with London this season, and there is no question that his hands and skills bring a lot to the table in the offensive zone. But if he isn't going to be on the first powerplay unit, it could certainly be argued that he isn't of AS MUCH value to the team.

- After all this, the US brass are going to London to watch Schremp over the next couple of weeks to get a better update on his play. It seems they are going out of their way to give him another look. Let's face it, they can't give him a job based simply on looking at the OHL scoring leaders - they will base their decision on other factors, including how they see him play. There are four London guys on the top scorers list after all, as the Knights are the highest scoring team in junior hockey.

It's still a reasonable argument to say he should be on the team, but let's get over this stuff about the US brass being idiots. Perhaps their gold medal win last year without Schremp should buy them a bit of slack.
Great points & just to reiterate. My understanding is that Schremp gets a grossly disproportionate amount of his points on the power play (did last year anyways) & is not "great" at regular strength. If true , this obviously speaks to some flaw in his game when it comes to 5 on 5 hockey. There are lots of guys than can play pond hockey & 4 on 4 who are not all that effectual when playing real hockey for whatever reason (these guys are obviously the "skill guys, though not neccesarily great skaters). Given that there would undoubtedly be guys who bring his offensive prowess or close to it to the table, & who also may bring a whole lot more (arguably) to the table when at even strength & shorthanded, its really not that difficult if all this is true ( ie concerns about alleged attitude & 5 on 5 "point") to see why Scremp is not a slam dunk.

Sammy* is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 10:27 AM
  #48
pucks1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy
Great points & just to reiterate. My understanding is that Schremp gets a grossly disproportionate amount of his points on the power play (did last year anyways) & is not "great" at regular strength. If true , this obviously speaks to some flaw in his game when it comes to 5 on 5 hockey. There are lots of guys than can play pond hockey & 4 on 4 who are not all that effectual when playing real hockey for whatever reason (these guys are obviously the "skill guys, though not neccesarily great skaters). Given that there would undoubtedly be guys who bring his offensive prowess or close to it to the table, & who also may bring a whole lot more (arguably) to the table when at even strength & shorthanded, its really not that difficult if all this is true ( ie concerns about alleged attitude & 5 on 5 "point") to see why Scremp is not a slam dunk.
He scored on mostley on the power play last year becuase he was limmited ice time. This year he is in top 5 in points in the O. And he dosn't allways need to score when you have a stacked team.

pucks1 is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 10:46 AM
  #49
Dr.Sens(e)
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 6,158
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pucks1
He scored on mostley on the power play last year becuase he was limmited ice time. This year he is in top 5 in points in the O. And he dosn't allways need to score when you have a stacked team.
So far, Schremp has 6 goals and 9 assists on the powerplay. 15 PP points in 18 games, which is more than half of his points. That is a disproportionate # of PP points compared to most league leaders. So he has 7 goals and 7 assists for 14 points in 18 games at even strength.

As an example on his team, David Bolland only has 3 powerplay goals and is actually outscoring Schremp at even strength (11 goals total, 8 goals at ES).

All that being said, Schremp is very good on the powerplay and deserves to be on their top unit. The question is really how effective is he compared to his peers at even strength and if you take the PP time away (which may happen on team US). I really haven't seen enough of him to comment one way or another.

Dr.Sens(e) is offline  
Old
11-10-2004, 10:47 AM
  #50
Rabid Ranger
Imperiled Knight
 
Rabid Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: The Abyss
Country: United States
Posts: 19,326
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy
Great points & just to reiterate. My understanding is that Schremp gets a grossly disproportionate amount of his points on the power play (did last year anyways) & is not "great" at regular strength. If true , this obviously speaks to some flaw in his game when it comes to 5 on 5 hockey. There are lots of guys than can play pond hockey & 4 on 4 who are not all that effectual when playing real hockey for whatever reason (these guys are obviously the "skill guys, though not neccesarily great skaters). Given that there would undoubtedly be guys who bring his offensive prowess or close to it to the table, & who also may bring a whole lot more (arguably) to the table when at even strength & shorthanded, its really not that difficult if all this is true ( ie concerns about alleged attitude & 5 on 5 "point") to see why Scremp is not a slam dunk.

This season, 18 out of his 29 points are from the power play. That's more than half, but not outrageous IMO, especially for a top scorer on the top team in the league. To me, that speaks well of not only how good he is, but how good the team is. To me, Schremp is a Doug Weight clone, who also scores the majority of his points on the PP.

Rabid Ranger is online now  
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 05:27 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.