Sunday, October 16, 2005
Powerplay specialist? We don't need no stinking powerplay specialist.
I apologize if this causes Cosh to lose another meal, but Schremp just tied Corey Perry's Knight's record of 2 goals and 6 assists in a single game to give him 10-18-28 in 6 games.
22 of those 28 points were on the powerplay.
He was first star in four of the six games.
But hey, Todd Harvey and Fernando Pisani are more defensively responsible.
I'm not entirely sure whether I want a Schremp update to become a permanent feature here or not.
22 of those 28 points were on the powerplay.
He was first star in four of the six games.
But hey, Todd Harvey and Fernando Pisani are more defensively responsible.
I'm not entirely sure whether I want a Schremp update to become a permanent feature here or not.
# posted by sacamano @ 6:37 pm 
Comments:
Uggh. That hurts. Then again, he may pick up the Oiler habits of a) shooting from the point directly into an opposing players shin pads and b) blasting a "howitzer" that "just misses the net."
Sac, you are the NHL stats man. Do they keep track of shots that miss the net?
I'm not sure Colby throwing up in his mouth again is either here or there, no offence. OTOH, if keeping it as a regular thing would make Lowe/MacT throw up in their mouths, keep rolling out the Schremp stats.
Don't make me go into another rant about how poor NHL stats are.
But, ya, they do keep track (column MS).
It looks like Calgary actually had more missed shots than Edmonton last game. Of course, Phaneuf put up all four of his on a single shift.
You know, I seem to remember someone, some time, saying something about Schremp in a certain comments section . I believe it was...
Pleasure Motors said: I really have to say, I think it's a big mistake to send Schremp down this early, even if it means giving up Rita. I think Schremp has proved that he isn't going to learn much of anything in juniors, at least not if he doesn't get his helmet handed to him in the pros for a bit first...
But someone happened to disagree...
Sacamano said: My guess is that they go with Rita. And I'm comfortable with that call. I really think that the media and Oil fans got seduced by Schremp, but that Rita will have a very solid year.
Sorry, but I couldn't resist. Anyway, I'd be interested in keeping track of Schremp's play; I'll do it over on Covered in Oil, if you don't want to keep it up here.
My point exactly.
If I were to continuously update this wunderkid's stats, it would not only depress me, it also would remind me of what an atrociouis judge of talent I am.
Talk about getting seduced - Rita apparently had me at hello. He certainly hasn't done anything else since draft day.
If you want to do it, it's all yours - under the condition that you also follow Pouliot, who I think will end up better in the long run
Those numbers are pretty impressive.... But don't forget Schremp was given more than a fair chance here this preseason and didn't produce....
>But don't forget Schremp was given more than a fair chance here this preseason and didn't produce....
Schremp and Rita both had 1 point, minus 1 and minus 4 respectively. It's also worth noting that Rita played one more game than Schremp. I don't think we saw enough to really know.
Post a Comment
<< Home
Uggh. That hurts. Then again, he may pick up the Oiler habits of a) shooting from the point directly into an opposing players shin pads and b) blasting a "howitzer" that "just misses the net."
Sac, you are the NHL stats man. Do they keep track of shots that miss the net?
I'm not sure Colby throwing up in his mouth again is either here or there, no offence. OTOH, if keeping it as a regular thing would make Lowe/MacT throw up in their mouths, keep rolling out the Schremp stats.
# posted by 
: October 16, 2005 7:14 pm
: October 16, 2005 7:14 pm Don't make me go into another rant about how poor NHL stats are.
But, ya, they do keep track (column MS).
It looks like Calgary actually had more missed shots than Edmonton last game. Of course, Phaneuf put up all four of his on a single shift.
You know, I seem to remember someone, some time, saying something about Schremp in a certain comments section . I believe it was...
Pleasure Motors said: I really have to say, I think it's a big mistake to send Schremp down this early, even if it means giving up Rita. I think Schremp has proved that he isn't going to learn much of anything in juniors, at least not if he doesn't get his helmet handed to him in the pros for a bit first...
But someone happened to disagree...
Sacamano said: My guess is that they go with Rita. And I'm comfortable with that call. I really think that the media and Oil fans got seduced by Schremp, but that Rita will have a very solid year.
Sorry, but I couldn't resist. Anyway, I'd be interested in keeping track of Schremp's play; I'll do it over on Covered in Oil, if you don't want to keep it up here.
My point exactly.
If I were to continuously update this wunderkid's stats, it would not only depress me, it also would remind me of what an atrociouis judge of talent I am.
Talk about getting seduced - Rita apparently had me at hello. He certainly hasn't done anything else since draft day.
If you want to do it, it's all yours - under the condition that you also follow Pouliot, who I think will end up better in the long run
Those numbers are pretty impressive.... But don't forget Schremp was given more than a fair chance here this preseason and didn't produce....
# posted by : October 17, 2005 8:20 am
: October 17, 2005 8:20 am >But don't forget Schremp was given more than a fair chance here this preseason and didn't produce....
Schremp and Rita both had 1 point, minus 1 and minus 4 respectively. It's also worth noting that Rita played one more game than Schremp. I don't think we saw enough to really know.
Post a Comment
<< Home
