HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Other Leagues > Canadian Junior Hockey > OHL

Best Player In the OHL

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-24-2006, 07:42 AM
  #76
FearTheFlyers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trippyime
Is this Matt 91+2? You sound about as intelligent on the issue.
No need for the deathly insults.

I just call them like I see him. He's Chad Larose bad.

FearTheFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2006, 07:53 AM
  #77
thomasincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,668
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trippyime
Is this Matt 91+2? You sound about as intelligent on the issue.
Gagne is more of a Simon Cowell in the Junior Boards. He knows what he's talking about but there is no filter in his brain most of the time. He just says what he thinks. I've grown to enjoy reading his opinions over the last year - when they aren't shots at me.

He had a "hate-on" for Perry last year as well, but I think it was at least partially justified.

thomasincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2006, 01:59 PM
  #78
Ex Storm
Dig out your soul...
 
Ex Storm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GagneOwnsYou
No need for the deathly insults.

I just call them like I see him. He's Chad Larose bad.
Sorry, that was a bit harsh. I just sensed a similarity. Only one other person I know of says things like that.

Ex Storm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2006, 03:46 PM
  #79
FearTheFlyers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thomasincanada
Gagne is more of a Simon Cowell in the Junior Boards. He knows what he's talking about but there is no filter in his brain most of the time. He just says what he thinks. I've grown to enjoy reading his opinions over the last year - when they aren't shots at me.

He had a "hate-on" for Perry last year as well, but I think it was at least partially justified.
That's a pretty good description, sadly.

I don't have a hate-on for Callahan, I just dislike divers. And he dives a lot. Doesn't matter on the team, I hated it when Big Snake did it too.

FearTheFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2006, 07:22 PM
  #80
JrHockeyFan
Registered User
 
JrHockeyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,521
vCash: 500
It is easy

Quote:
Originally Posted by trippyime
I didn't say draft. By draft, you're implying that this is either a couple years ago in their draft year, or a number of years ago when they were drafted into the OHL. I'm sitting here playing armchair GM, I like the complete package that Callahan gives me. I said he was close to the best players in the league, not the best. I also said it would be silly to put him in the same category of player as Schremp, Ryan, Bolland etc. But, if I was building a TEAM, Callahan is the guy I want. And right now, I'm only talking about the OHL, I don't care at this point about NHL potential. Sometimes, you take players that are best for the team. Example: Mike Richards getting drafted ahead of Perry. Perry was a lot better offensively, but, Richards was better for the team.



As I've already said, Parent doesn't have much of an offensive game, and I don't really care. Forwards can score goals, there are defensive guys who are "offensive" specialists as well. I'm talking about a guy's ability to play defense, shut down top forwards and do it cleanly. I don't pick Staal ahead of Parent. If I want better offensive numbers (the cop-out when looking at defensemen), then sure, pick Staal. There is not a better defenseman in the league at DEFENSE than Parent. His minus 5? Playing with a 15 year old rookie 25 minutes a night who makes a ton of mistakes, jumping up in the play, that costs them goals nearly every game.



I was talking about goal scoring. I was talking about Ryan Callahan, who is for the most part, a pure goal scorer.

Schremp: 45 goals, 30 on the PP = 67%
Bolland: 45 goals, 28 on the PP = 62%
Wolski: 34 goals, 22 on the PP = 65%
Ryan: 30 goals, 11 on the PP = 37% (better, but he's more of a set-up guy)
Callahan: 43 goals, 17 on the PP = 40%

It's all fine and dandy to score goals on the PP, I'm just more impressed by someone who doesn't need an advantage. I'm not knocking them, I'm just saying this is my preference.



I know what you mean about Valabik, I can't stand him.
I realize you did not say "draft". The point is that given the opportunity to actually choose players by whatever mechanism, I strongly doubt that Callahan would be chosen ahead of those other guys. I am not going to argue your "preferences" because they belong to you. But do not expect to have much company in agreeing with your preference, and do not expect to convince others solely by your "preferences".

Whether the players mentioned were available via draft or trade deadline, I think Callahan would be a good guy to pick up, but I doubt it would be ahead of those other players. Again, if that is your preference, fine. You could choose a lot of guys solely based upon preferences. It doesn't make it the best choice though. Just don't let a Storm jersey rule your choice so much.

As for your power play argument, it totally ignores the fact that these guys often were denied great scoring chances at full strength and drew penalties. It also ignores the fact that they play on the power play because they ARE great players. Furthermore this ability is why some teams have 30% PP success and others much lower. If Callahan is such a pure scorer, then why doesn't he pot more PP goals or assists?

As for Parent and Staal: When talking about Callahan you argued he was "the package". So how come a guy like Staal who can score AND play great defense comes up so short in this comparison. Staal is a plus 17 compared to Parent. And Staal doesn't have any better support than Parent when it comes to defensive hockey. Guelph plays a defensive style of game where Parent gets help from more than just a partner. Not to mention MacDonald who you sing the praises of. BTW: Perhaps the forwards for Guelph would score more often (PP or even strength) if Parent had Staal's ability to help that way (33 assists).


Anyway, that's about all I need to say. I could accept your "preferences" if you were not trying to make Callahan and Parent out to be the best (by whatever criteria). They are really good players, but making them out to be the best stretches it. You need some stats to back that up.

By the way, did I tell you that I like that avatar?

JrHockeyFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2006, 10:04 PM
  #81
Ex Storm
Dig out your soul...
 
Ex Storm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
I realize you did not say "draft". The point is that given the opportunity to actually choose players by whatever mechanism, I strongly doubt that Callahan would be chosen ahead of those other guys. I am not going to argue your "preferences" because they belong to you. But do not expect to have much company in agreeing with your preference, and do not expect to convince others solely by your "preferences".
I'm not expecting anyone to agree with me. I just said sometimes you take players based on team-first ideals. I'm not arguing that Callahan is a better hockey player than Schremp, Bolland...whatever the list may be. Their numbers speak for themselves. Again, it's just my preference in "types" of hockey players. As I already said, offensively gifted players aren't the be-all end-all of the game. Mike Richards, drafted ahead of Corey Perry is an example I already gave you. Steve Downie drafted in the first round last year, I'm sure there were a number of other offensively gifted players, moreso than Downie, taken behind him. Sometimes you've got to think team first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
Whether the players mentioned were available via draft or trade deadline, I think Callahan would be a good guy to pick up, but I doubt it would be ahead of those other players. Again, if that is your preference, fine. You could choose a lot of guys solely based upon preferences. It doesn't make it the best choice though. Just don't let a Storm jersey rule your choice so much.
I'm not letting a Storm jersey effect my choice. If I have to say why, it comes down to the package, as you said. Callahan, to me, brings just about everything you need. The other guys, bring something you need. To me, the only other elite player that is close to being the complete package in the OHL right now is Bolland. Everyone else comes with a "yeah, but". Schremp's attitude and discipline, Ryan's skating, Wolski's effort etc...just to name a few.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
As for your power play argument, it totally ignores the fact that these guys often were denied great scoring chances at full strength and drew penalties. It also ignores the fact that they play on the power play because they ARE great players. Furthermore this ability is why some teams have 30% PP success and others much lower. If Callahan is such a pure scorer, then why doesn't he pot more PP goals or assists?
This one is answered very easily. Have you seen the Guelph PP? It's disgusting. I don't know what it is, but the Storm will kill you 5 on 5, but if you give them an advantage, they stop working. Blame it on Callahan if it makes you feel better. It's a team game and they stink on the PP.

But telling me I'm ignoring circumstances regarding "denied" scoring chances is just the same as ignoring the circumstances that make Ryan Parent a -5 right now, or the circumstances that sees Callahan score more 5 on 5 than with the powerplay. Callahan would have at least 70-80 goals if he wasn't dragged down every shift or everytime he had a breakaway. Pointless argument, really.

Quote:
As for Parent and Staal: When talking about Callahan you argued he was "the package". So how come a guy like Staal who can score AND play great defense comes up so short in this comparison. Staal is a plus 17 compared to Parent. And Staal doesn't have any better support than Parent when it comes to defensive hockey. Guelph plays a defensive style of game where Parent gets help from more than just a partner. Not to mention MacDonald who you sing the praises of. BTW: Perhaps the forwards for Guelph would score more often (PP or even strength) if Parent had Staal's ability to help that way (33 assists).
I never said Parent was a better package, nor did I say Staal comes up short anywhere. I said I was talking about defense. I don't really concern myself with worrying too much about defensemen putting up big numbers. It's an added bonus as far as I'm concerned. Defensemen play defense, that's their number one job, that's what they should be good at. Staal and Parent, in my opinion, are two different calibre of defensemen and I don't like comparing. You'll often see me not wanting to compare the two or want to say who is better. You'll see me making the differentiation and saying that Parent is better defensively. Staal is a more rounded defenseman. Again, it's about preference. If I want a guy who will shut down the other team's top player, and I could only choose one, I choose Parent. If I have to choose a guy who can also put up numbers, I choose Staal. I appreciate defense a lot more than some people. You don't have to agree with me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
Anyway, that's about all I need to say. I could accept your "preferences" if you were not trying to make Callahan and Parent out to be the best (by whatever criteria). They are really good players, but making them out to be the best stretches it. You need some stats to back that up.
I'm not trying to do anything. Someone asked my opinion of Callahan, I told them. And really, if you can tell me who is a better defensive defenseman in this league, I dare you to. That's not just me talking. Don't make it out to be a Guelph Storm thing. I have every confidence I'm not a homeristic yahoo talking out my *** about Ryan Parent. I think he proved why at the World Juniors and pretty much every game he plays.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
By the way, did I tell you that I like that avatar?
Thanks.

Ex Storm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2006, 06:39 PM
  #82
JrHockeyFan
Registered User
 
JrHockeyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,521
vCash: 500
Well Trippy

Guelph has 80 pp goals in 449 opportunities for 17.8%

Callahan has 26 pp pts (17 g and 9 a) in 394 opportunities

Of Callahan's 43 goals: 17 pp, 5 SH, 4 EN goals (one of which was SH), 1 PEN shot. 26 goals were "non-pp" goals

As I understood it you wanted to look at scoring situations where the player had no advantages. You considered that Callahan's numbers indicated a "pure scorer". Let's take away the 4 EN goals and the PEN shot. That leaves 21 goals and 17 assists (minus 1 EN assist). That gives 38 "pure" points. Not really all that much.

If Callahan was a "complete package" player he would also be a good play maker AND a good power play man. I don't see a lot of assists. Not to mention only 9 pp assists in 394 opportunities. A great play maker is the kind of player that boosts his team's PP average up by seeing the ice well, puck handling ability, good passing, good shot, etc. He is also unselfish about passing the puck. Those are the skills that make for a great power play, and a great player too.

As for Schremp having attitude and discipline problems, I think 2003/2004 is water WAY under the bridge. The guy has been terrific this year.

The simple test is this: So how strong are those "preferences"? If you could get Schremp for Callahan in a trade right now, would you do it?

JrHockeyFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2006, 08:38 PM
  #83
Ex Storm
Dig out your soul...
 
Ex Storm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
Guelph has 80 pp goals in 449 opportunities for 17.8%

Callahan has 26 pp pts (17 g and 9 a) in 394 opportunities

Of Callahan's 43 goals: 17 pp, 5 SH, 4 EN goals (one of which was SH), 1 PEN shot. 26 goals were "non-pp" goals

As I understood it you wanted to look at scoring situations where the player had no advantages. You considered that Callahan's numbers indicated a "pure scorer". Let's take away the 4 EN goals and the PEN shot. That leaves 21 goals and 17 assists (minus 1 EN assist). That gives 38 "pure" points. Not really all that much.
You're taking this far too seriously. Callahan puts the puck in the net, relying less on the PP than Schremp (since you've turned this into a Callahan vs. Schremp debate).

I'm not about to look through the gamesheets, so you're getting a huge benefit of the doubt here. Schremp does not have a SH goal this season, not sure about SH assists. I don't know if he has a penalty shot goal or any EN goals, but I'm willing to bet there's at least one.

Without the PP alone, Schremp has 37 points. That's less than Callahan, without factoring in the other categories that you subtracted from Callahan's totals. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to fill me in on EN/PS goals and SH assists?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
If Callahan was a "complete package" player he would also be a good play maker AND a good power play man. I don't see a lot of assists. Not to mention only 9 pp assists in 394 opportunities. A great play maker is the kind of player that boosts his team's PP average up by seeing the ice well, puck handling ability, good passing, good shot, etc. He is also unselfish about passing the puck. Those are the skills that make for a great power play, and a great player too.
Callahan is a good powerplay man, he's not the one making the mistakes out there. As I said, it's a team game and he can't be faulted entirely for a bad powerplay. He is a good passer, but he's been on a line most of the year with Mike Mclean and Mark O'Leary, two checkers who don't have finish. I find it remarkable how many points he's put up given his usual linemates.

I'm not saying that having a lot of PP points is a bad thing. Getting a ton of points, especially the amount Rob has this year, is nothing short of incredible. I would just like to see him put up more even strength points, because it gives me the impression that he CAN'T score very well without a PP, and I'm not the only one who has ever pointed this out. If Ryan Callahan played every minute of every powerplay (London seems to average a ridiculous amount of powerplays every game as well) alongside Bolland, Hunter, Kostitsyn and whoever else is on the wing, he would have 100 points or so already as well. In fact, he'd have more than Schremp's 47 goals, I can guarantee that as well. But no, Callahan plays the PP with Matt D'Agostini, Kelsey Wilson, Ryan Parent and Drew Doughty (wooo! what a tower of power that combo is!).

Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
As for Schremp having attitude and discipline problems, I think 2003/2004 is water WAY under the bridge. The guy has been terrific this year.
Spearing a fan, starting brawls when losing (Guelph a few weeks ago, one example) is not terrific. He's still got some anger issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
The simple test is this: So how strong are those "preferences"? If you could get Schremp for Callahan in a trade right now, would you do it?
Depends, do I want a hard-working team or a powerplay machine?

The results, head to head, have been obvious. When London doesn't get 10-12 powerplays against Guelph, they lose.

Ex Storm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2006, 03:00 PM
  #84
FearTheFlyers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trippyime


Spearing a fan.
If someone spat on me I'd be in there as fast as Schremp was.

FearTheFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2006, 11:36 PM
  #85
storm fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 292
vCash: 500
If Callahan's team mates scored on the great passes he continually gives them, he would have more assists. He sets up his line mates, but they do not have the ability to put the puck in the net like Schremp's line mates.

storm fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2006, 11:19 AM
  #86
rigger
Registered User
 
rigger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Jessica Alba's Dream
Country: Kyrgyzstan
Posts: 8,950
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trippyime
You're taking this far too seriously. Callahan puts the puck in the net, relying less on the PP than Schremp (since you've turned this into a Callahan vs. Schremp debate).

Without the PP alone, Schremp has 37 points. That's less than Callahan, without factoring in the other categories that you subtracted from Callahan's totals. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to fill me in on EN/PS goals and SH assists?

I'm not saying that having a lot of PP points is a bad thing. I would just like to see him put up more even strength points, because it gives me the impression that he CAN'T score very well without a PP. If Ryan Callahan played every minute of every powerplay (London seems to average a ridiculous amount of powerplays every game as well) alongside Bolland, Hunter, Kostitsyn and whoever else is on the wing, he would have 100 points or so already as well. In fact, he'd have more than Schremp's 47 goals, I can guarantee that as well.
I am not going to argue with you here but it has to be mentioned that Schremp will play 4 minutes straight of power play minutes, he carries the puck in, he QB's the PP, makes passes and shoots more then anyone else (maybe Bolland shoots more), after that the guy is tired, so he goes to the bench, then 2 minutes later (when he regains his breath) another PP is called and he is out there again. He is starved of ES minutes. Why would Hunter take him off the PP to play more even strength? There is no reason. Since you seem to be pretty good finding ES pts vs. PP, try find a shift chart and see who averages more ES time and I bet Schremps averages as many points per minute at ES as your boy Callahan.

P.S. I like Callahan a lot too but these two guys are not worth comparing.

rigger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2006, 06:35 PM
  #87
JrHockeyFan
Registered User
 
JrHockeyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,521
vCash: 500
Just to close this out

I don't consider this a Schremp vs Callahan thing. But you have turned it into some kind of non-powerplay goal machismo kinda thing to make Callahan out to be what you call a "pure scorer".

Callahan is a talented kid, no doubt about it. But if you go to the "stats/records" tabs on the OHL page, call up "powerplay assists". Click to the very last page to find Callahan with 10 at 123rd spot.

Slice and dice it any way that you want to. There is something wrong with that. A lot more significant and flawed than having a high proportion of PP scoring.

The complete "package" type player does MUCH better than that. The complete package ALSO makes the players around him better. Blaming Callahan's line mates is really lame.

Quote:
Depends, do I want a hard-working team or a powerplay machine?
Is there an answer in there? I asked if you would trade Callahan for Schremp, but I do not see a yes or no answer. Just suggestions that Schremp is not hard working team . . . (player I assume) as Callahan and is just a powerplay machine. Could you please give a YES or NO answer?

Now I realize that Schremp can be a love him or hate him kinda guy. A lot of that has to do with how well he has done. BUT > > > there are very few guys in the OHL that come close to working as hard as this guy does. If you suggest otherwise you really don't know squat about the kid. And he is successful on the powerplay because of his skills, he is not successful because he is on the powerplay.

As for your attitude shots: The league viewed the incident at Kitchener and found that there was no spearing. The "fans" were spitting at players at the gate and on the bench though.TV footage showed that the "fans" reporting a spear lied. There was no discipline of any kind. So you can stow that one away. And as for starting brawls, gimme a break.

Quote:
The results, head to head, have been obvious. When London doesn't get 10-12 powerplays against Guelph, they lose
So all Guelph has to do is stay out of the box, or is it all the refs fault?

JrHockeyFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-04-2006, 07:15 PM
  #88
CharlieGirl
Registered User
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
As for your attitude shots: The league viewed the incident at Kitchener and found that there was no spearing. The "fans" were spitting at players at the gate and on the bench though.TV footage showed that the "fans" reporting a spear lied.
Alright... perhaps you can explain how fans were spitting through glass to the bench? I call BS on this one.

As for the spearing incident, the TV footage that was shown missed most of the altercation - I was there, I saw it, and it was clear that Schremp interacted with a fan in a most inappropriate manner. No chance in hell he was "pointing out an offender" - it was a clear spearing motion and he did make contact with at least one fan. The fact that the league chose to overlook this does not make Schremp innocent - simply very, very fortunate that the Rogers crew missed most of the situation.

CharlieGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-11-2006, 04:25 PM
  #89
JrHockeyFan
Registered User
 
JrHockeyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,521
vCash: 500
well . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie_Girl
Alright... perhaps you can explain how fans were spitting through glass to the bench? I call BS on this one.

As for the spearing incident, the TV footage that was shown missed most of the altercation - I was there, I saw it, and it was clear that Schremp interacted with a fan in a most inappropriate manner. No chance in hell he was "pointing out an offender" - it was a clear spearing motion and he did make contact with at least one fan. The fact that the league chose to overlook this does not make Schremp innocent - simply very, very fortunate that the Rogers crew missed most of the situation.
Schremp is always the last guy off the ice as a team ritual and he stands by the boards at the gate. That is where the publicized incident occurred.

Are you denying that spitting took place? Plus, if you were at the game, how would you know what was shown by Rogers? What was shown was Schremp gesturing with his stick without making contact with anyone. The Kitchener commentators did say a lot of stuff at the time though and were clearly making more out of it than what happened, which in itself is hardly surprising.

Are you sure you were close enough to see contact. What was the "situation"? You don't seem to be pointing out anything fans did when it is obvious that they did something. There is such a thing as "inappropriate" fan conduct too. Imagine if a player spat at a fan.

As for the bench spitting incident I believe that it occurred the next game. Players and one coach were quoted about it. I see no reason to doubt what they are saying. I seem to recall mention of an opening in the glass behind the bench. In any case, the spitting at the bench and at the exit were different matters.

I am not about to criticize all Ranger fans, but it seems that this kind of stuff at the Aud is not new. Some folks can't behave properly. Why aren't you critical of them?

The league did not choose to "overlook" the matter. They investigated it beyond simple TV coverage, and found no reason to act, which certainly does not make him guilty of anything. It certainly doesn't make him any less of a good hockey player which is what the thread is about, isn't it?

JrHockeyFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2006, 09:44 AM
  #90
hockeyfan85
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 32
vCash: 500
The next time the Knights returned to Kitchener they had a wooden shelter for them to walk through to get to and from the ice so they would not be spit on. No protection behind the bench though, as I saw a number of people standing and trying to spit over into the bench. So yes, it 100% did happen.

And I totally agree with all of JrHockeyFan's points about Schremp and his ES play, there really just isn't enough time for him to play the PP and ES. But he had a gorgeous ES goal last night and many chances, so it's not an issue of him being unable to score when they are ES.

hockeyfan85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2006, 09:49 AM
  #91
FearTheFlyers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 7,553
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfan85
No protection behind the bench though, as I saw a number of people standing and trying to spit over into the bench.

Sure you did.

FearTheFlyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2006, 10:07 AM
  #92
hockeyfan85
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 32
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GagneOwnsYou
Sure you did.
Yes, I did. I was in the corner section to the left of the bench and I could clearly see grown men trying to spit on teenagers...

hockeyfan85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2006, 11:29 AM
  #93
CharlieGirl
Registered User
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
Schremp is always the last guy off the ice as a team ritual and he stands by the boards at the gate. That is where the publicized incident occurred.

Are you denying that spitting took place? Plus, if you were at the game, how would you know what was shown by Rogers? What was shown was Schremp gesturing with his stick without making contact with anyone. The Kitchener commentators did say a lot of stuff at the time though and were clearly making more out of it than what happened, which in itself is hardly surprising.

Are you sure you were close enough to see contact. What was the "situation"? You don't seem to be pointing out anything fans did when it is obvious that they did something. There is such a thing as "inappropriate" fan conduct too. Imagine if a player spat at a fan.

As for the bench spitting incident I believe that it occurred the next game. Players and one coach were quoted about it. I see no reason to doubt what they are saying. I seem to recall mention of an opening in the glass behind the bench. In any case, the spitting at the bench and at the exit were different matters.

I am not about to criticize all Ranger fans, but it seems that this kind of stuff at the Aud is not new. Some folks can't behave properly. Why aren't you critical of them?

The league did not choose to "overlook" the matter. They investigated it beyond simple TV coverage, and found no reason to act, which certainly does not make him guilty of anything. It certainly doesn't make him any less of a good hockey player which is what the thread is about, isn't it?
IF (and that is an if - it's his word against no one's - I don't know if he was, I don't know if he wasn't) Schremp were spat at, I understand him being pissed about it... BUT he handled it inappropriately. I personally feel that it's the lowest thing a person can do to another. I've seen the clips (in fact, I'm pretty sure they were posted on here) and they don't show half of the spearing incident. There was direct, clear, spearing motions (yes, more than one) by Schremp to the fans. The Rogers cameras caught a fraction of a moment - that's what saved Schremp's *** with Branch. It's unfortunate, because it's now set precedent where contact between a player and a fan was allowed.

As far as the fans in Kitchener - I have never, nor will I ever, condone the jerks that sit behind the benches. There are a few who should be banned from the Aud, as far as I'm concerned.

Why can you not admit that, while he has unreal talent on the ice, he's a sore loser and shows crappy sportsmanship? And yes, I said he's talented.

CharlieGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2006, 11:31 AM
  #94
CharlieGirl
Registered User
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfan85
The next time the Knights returned to Kitchener they had a wooden shelter for them to walk through to get to and from the ice so they would not be spit on. No protection behind the bench though, as I saw a number of people standing and trying to spit over into the bench. So yes, it 100% did happen.
Would that be the same vinyl shelter that's been in place for years at the Aud for the visiting teams? Nice try.

CharlieGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2006, 02:41 PM
  #95
hockeyfan85
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 32
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie_Girl
Would that be the same vinyl shelter that's been in place for years at the Aud for the visiting teams? Nice try.
I guess it would be. I had never noticed it before, and neither had Rangers fans I asked (but it's not really something you would notice). I'm glad to hear it didn't actually go to that desperate of measures. Thanks for the info

But this one off-ice incident really has little to do with who is the best player in the OHL... Not that it is neccessarily Schremp, but I don't think that this really means that he still has the attitude problems of previous years. Most of the times he is a mature, well-behaved player. But that's not what makes good news, and unfortunately he does enough other stupid stuff that does. Maybe he'll learn when he is put in his place a bit in the NHL

hockeyfan85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2006, 04:46 PM
  #96
JrHockeyFan
Registered User
 
JrHockeyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,521
vCash: 500
Not quite

Quote:
IF (and that is an if - it's his word against no one's - I don't know if he was, I don't know if he wasn't) Schremp were spat at, I understand him being pissed about it... BUT he handled it inappropriately. I personally feel that it's the lowest thing a person can do to another. I've seen the clips (in fact, I'm pretty sure they were posted on here) and they don't show half of the spearing incident. There was direct, clear, spearing motions (yes, more than one) by Schremp to the fans. The Rogers cameras caught a fraction of a moment - that's what saved Schremp's *** with Branch. It's unfortunate, because it's now set precedent where contact between a player and a fan was allowed.

As far as the fans in Kitchener - I have never, nor will I ever, condone the jerks that sit behind the benches. There are a few who should be banned from the Aud, as far as I'm concerned.

Why can you not admit that, while he has unreal talent on the ice, he's a sore loser and shows crappy sportsmanship? And yes, I said he's talented.
It is pretty clear from more than just Rob Schremp that "fans" were spitting, so drop the IF stuff. Like he would just all of a sudden get involved with the fans for no reason at all.

As for clips, they are just that, clips. The OHL did more than just look at a "fraction of a moment" of video. The standards on this are pretty strict, so if they said he was not guilty there was no a$$ saving involved. Get over it.

Finally, you earlier said:
Quote:
Alright... perhaps you can explain how fans were spitting through glass to the bench? I call BS on this one.
Now all of a sudden you don't condone the "jerks behind the bench". Which way is it? Is it because people say they saw this behaviour take place? If this is standard stuff (and I have heard that it gets pretty bad) the Rangers should be doing something about it. Turning a blind eye to routine behaviour is what allows precedents to be set, not a single incident like this involving Schremp. Fans need to be held just as accountable. If I had a jerk like that sitting in my section I would complain to the JLC and the Knights.

I do not share your opinion regarding Schremp's behaviour. There are many who behave worse, but since they are not leading in scoring do not attract as much attention. The guy acts like a hot dog at times, and I wish he would stop it, but that's about it. Personally I think the gold standard in the OHL for being a poor sport and sore loser belongs to Boris Valabik. Extremely chippy play. Cheap shots galore. Whines CONSTANTLY to the refs (watch closely and see if it isn't true). Takes the most sissy dives I have ever seen a player his size take. Somebody lays a good clean hard check on him and he retaliates in the most undisciplined ways.

Anway, I am not the one who got off on this tangent. With skills it is easier for people to be objective. You can't say the same about character assessment. So why don't we just stick to the skills?

JrHockeyFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2006, 04:51 PM
  #97
JrHockeyFan
Registered User
 
JrHockeyFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,521
vCash: 500
Hmmm

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie_Girl
Would that be the same vinyl shelter that's been in place for years at the Aud for the visiting teams? Nice try.
Some places don't have (or need) a vinyl shelter. Perhaps that is why he mentioned it?

JrHockeyFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2006, 06:44 PM
  #98
Ex Storm
Dig out your soul...
 
Ex Storm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,075
vCash: 500
I have a good fan-to-fan relationship with CG and I respect a lot of Ranger fans that I talk to on the boards, and I totally agree with her about the Schremp thing. But, after last night's behaviour it's hard to say spitting on players is not above some Ranger fans.

Hey Jr, how about my boy? He tied Schremp last night for a moment in goals. He's now what, 13th in the league in points, 4th in goals with 51 behind only the infamous PP tandem of Bolland and Schremp and the guy who plays with Bobby Ryan. But he's not a pure goal scorer? He certainly came from nowhere to prove he's as good as I say, don't you think?

Ex Storm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2006, 06:44 PM
  #99
CharlieGirl
Registered User
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrHockeyFan
Now all of a sudden you don't condone the "jerks behind the bench". Which way is it?
All of a sudden? I challenge you to find any... and I mean ANY... post where I defended a fan acting like a donkey. Perhaps you should rethink this comment, because you clearly don't know what the hell you're talking about.

I'm done with this.... I'm not even going to begin to discuss Valabik. You have your opinion, I have mine. You have your opinion on Schremp, I have mine. I dislike your team, you dislike mine. Let's just leave it at that, shall we?

CharlieGirl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-13-2006, 06:46 PM
  #100
Ex Storm
Dig out your soul...
 
Ex Storm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie_Girl
All of a sudden? I challenge you to find any... and I mean ANY... post where I defended a fan acting like a donkey. Perhaps you should rethink this comment, because you clearly don't know what the hell you're talking about.

I'm done with this.... I'm not even going to begin to discuss Valabik. You have your opinion, I have mine. You have your opinion on Schremp, I have mine. I dislike your team, you dislike mine. Let's just leave it at that, shall we?
No no, let's discuss Valabik. He's my favourite!

Ex Storm is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 01:35 AM.

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.