It was an enjoyable in-person look at the pre-season BoA on Saturday night. I promised some impressions, so here we go. I've avoided looking at the gamesheet or most other accounts of the action to "keep it real".

1. Iginla-Tanguay-Langkow shifts were a time to get the head out of the popcorn and pay attention. They were dominant at times -- hemming the Oil in for entire shifts (noticed them v. Stoll-Raffi-Nilsson most often) -- and porous at others, the Stoll goal and the Cogliano winner being two of them.

2. If Souray and Greene are actually paired together in October, that's going to be... an adventure. Greene is still not very good (Lowetide's comments here, among others, are spot-on: the OT penalty was a stupid, and pointless, elbow to the head).

3. As described (predicted? feared?) in my preview of the defense, Adrian Aucoin simply does not look like a good powerplay defenseman. I sincerely doubt he's next to Phaneuf on the #1 unit by October 15th.

4. Calling him outstanding would be a bit of a stretch, but Cogliano was very good -- very very good for a 20-year-old -- and looks every bit the NHL player.

5. Adam Pardy, #8 on the Flames defensive depth chart, was an absolute revelation. He was extremely composed; he moved into open ice when he didn't have the puck; he hit; he could play. He was absolutely the best surprise of the night, never mind the goal and assist. Definitely looked like a better hockey player than I've ever seen David Hale.

6. Robert Nilsson also looked like an NHL player. The giveaway by Eriksson to him on Horcoff's shortie was a bad one, but Nilsson made a smart, talented, heads-up play to take advantage. (Overall, especially considering Hemsky and Penner weren't dressed, it looked to me like the defensemen will be a bigger question mark going into the season than the forwards. Also, the Oiler PP without those 2 gentlemen was almost uniformly atrocious. If Souray was set up for a PP shot so much as once, I missed it.)

7. Anders Eriksson looked really solid except for the one horrendous giveaway that led directly to a goal. Where would this assessment rank on a scale of 1 to 10? You decide!

8. Boyd and Moss had some excellent shifts, I thought. Both those guys should make the team: Brett Sutter showed some good things (though took 2 needless penalties), as did Warren Peters, but they're just not as good. Godard hasn't improved, I expect him to fill the same role as last year with about the same # of GP.

9. Marcus Nilson scored a goal, but... he barely belongs around any more (the goal was a fluke deflection). He can't create anything. I was hoping he was run down in the 2nd half last year; looks more likely now that he's just slow and weak. (And signed through next season!) I don't see what he's going to contribute; hope he proves me wrong.

10. #88, Robert X. Schremp, Esq.:

Apart from the couple of shifts he had at the end of last season, I've never seen Schremp play, and I have to say, it was nothing like I expected. I was labouring under the conventional wisdom that his offensive skills were there, but that he needed to work on his speed, his 2-way play, and his attitude (committment, effort, whatever you want to call it).

If this was accurate, the prognosis would be better than it is. 2-way play can be learned, effort can be exerted, and -- as Brett Hull and hundreds of other NHLers have demonstrated -- you can compensate for sub-par speed, by using your instincts and experience to move into open spots before the other guy.

I don't believe he's bored or petulant; he couldn't have made it even this far in camp if that was the case. Here's the triple-threat of liabilities as I saw them:

• (a) His decision-making is still poor. One particular play stands out to me. A Flame forward was going in one-on-one with Staios, and Schremp was backchecking (right on the Flame's hip). At about the hashmarks, the puck popped straight up, about 10 feet in the air. So, in the vicinity were Roloson, Staios, Schremp, and one Flame. The correct play here is basically to "box out" or otherwise tie up the Flame player, taking advantage of having three men to their one. What Schremp did was this: holding his stick tomahawk-style, and facing the net, he attempted to swipe the puck back toward the blueline (roughly the motion of breaking his stick over the crossbar, but on Rewind).
• (b) His instincts on what to do without the puck are awful -- on offense. Maybe I misinterpreted, but I assumed that when I read that he needed to work on his skating, that meant speed & footwork. What he actually needs to do is just skate. It's funny in a way: the typical profile of an offense-only forward is that he's a cherry-picker, going on jailbreaks at ill-advised times. Schremp appears to be nothing of the sort: his bad habit (the old ones die hard, no?) is coasting 6 feet away from a teammate who has the puck, waiting for a hand-off. The guy has been relied upon his whole hockey life to handle the puck himself, but he needs to train himself to get his ass up the ice, or into scoring position.
• (c) He's a bad passer. This was the most surprising to me. He's not a bad passer relative to other skilled forwards; he's a bad passer, period. He couldn't make a tape-to-tape pass to an uncovered teammate, although I should also point out that he seemed to have trouble determining who was uncovered anyway.

It's been pretty thoroughly reported that Schremp has been passed on the Oiler depth chart by just about everyone, so this isn't a nyah-nyah to Oil fans, just some observations. It's been the line for 2 years: Schremp's offensive abilities aren't yet enough to overcome his other shortcomings. What I didn't realize before Saturday is that statement says as much or more about his offensive abilities as it does his other shortcomings. And apparently that was his best game. Wow.

INSTANT UPDATE: MetroGnome and Kyle were also at the game, and offer their thoughts. As well, I've finally added TheRealDeal Hockey to the sidebar -- long overdue. He always has lots of good stuff on the Flames and Oilers, as well as Team Canada. Check it out.