Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Put Up Your Dukes #1 (Gagner/Schremp)



Welcome to Put Up Your Dukes.  This is a segment where we have a verbal fight about whatever floats our boats.  Today we fight about Gagner and Schremp.

---------------

Round 1

GAGNER ON THE 4TH LINE

Smokin' Ray Burnt - Hey Guy. Not sure if you know, but Gagner is on the 4th line to start the season. *sends text*

Paq Twinn - It is what it is, but I don't like Gags playing with some less talented guys like that.  That is Bullsh*t  in my opinion. Being demoted to the 3rd line would have been sufficient enough.  But this is nuts.

SRB - Yeah, but I thought that the 3rd line was more of a 1c, not an actual 3rd line.  The more I think of it, I'm cool with Gagner on the 4th line.  You get what you give.  So far this year... that's not much.

PT - For the record, I'm not cool with it.  Gags needs someone else on a line with him and it doesn't matter if it's the 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th line.  He needs someone with skill to play with.  What good is it doing him playing with Stortini and Moreau?

SRB - I agree to a point.  But there is a real answer to this problem.  Be better Gagner.  Be better and this wouldn't be an issue right now.  It's his fault.  Although, I bet this lasts only two games tops and he'll be back with Penner and Cogs where he belongs.

PT - I don't know man.  If this was the plan all along, then letting Schremp go was a mistake.  The Captain should have been put on waivers.  But I doubt anyone would take him. *shakes head in disgust*  How is he supposed to succeed playing with Moreau and Stortini?  Hey, maybe Storts will score more than Gags this year?  I reckon Quinn and Co. just made their 1st mistake.

SRB - You doubt the Mighty Quinn?  Pfft.  But I'm with you on Moreau.  Not sure why Nilsson isn't getting a shot with Gagner/Stortini.  Four lines of cream puffs and a side of crust.  Wait a minute.  Did you mention Schremp?  Time for round 2.  Ding, ding!

-------------------------------

Round 2

THE SCHREMP DEBATE

Paq Twinn - So long Schremp, if it was up to me you'd have gotten your chance here two years ago. Good luck in your home state.

Graham Martin - The thing is I don't think that he ever deserved a chance to crack the lineup in any of his years at training camp except maybe this year, and that is another reason (previous conversation) why I didn't like the Comrie signing cause I thought it spelt the end for Schremp. And if you don't show up in camp, you can't make the team, it is that simple.

PT - I agree that he didn't show enough in camp to make the teams past, I just think he should have got more then 7 games in the time he was here. He should have got 7 consecutive games, the year he got 76 points in Springfield, to show something. I just think the Oilers/MacT didn't give him a fair chance, especially when scoring was so sorely needed.

GM - Again, I have to go back to the whole defense thing (another previous conversation), and if you don't play it in the NHL, you are a serious liability. and after watching two of his preseason games, he is absolutely awful without the puck.

PT - I can't disagree with that, but you could possibly counter balance he liabilities by playing him with more defensively aware linemates. MacT just couldn't think outside of the box, or box+1, or diamond etc. he was too single minded as a coach. That's why Reddox and Peterson got so much ice time, just because they knew where to be without the puck. We had way too many players that knew what to do without the puck and not enough that knew what to do with the puck.

Smokin' Ray Burnt - *shows up late to the party*  On one hand, Graham is right. A guy needs to play defense first in order to be good in this league. Schremp can't do that.

However... Last year when Schremp had 3 points in 3 games (the 4th game doesn't count because he sat on the bench the whole game), How much better does a guy have to be? That's a point per game. That alone should have given him a better chance with the Oilers. But MacT wouldn't have any of that. Instead, Schremp goes back down and MacT rode the Red Ox for all he's worth.  Schremp and Nilsson were dynamite together in the AHL. Why were these two not paired together in the NHL?

SRB - On a side note: Dan Barnes said that Schremp's Dad sells Schremp Dogs outside the arena in Rochester. Too friggin' funny. Hmmm.. A hot dog player and a hot dog seller. #theworldisgettingmuchclearer

GM - You can put him with defensive minded players, but that takes away from his offensive flair. he needed to be with other scorers. But I do agree with last year, I thought he was better and deserved more games. But without the puck he has no idea what to do.

PT - Hypothetically I would have put him with Smyth and Horcoff back in the day, and put Hemsky with Stoll and Torres. I don't think they (94+10) would have stifled his offense and they could help out defensively. Hemsky would have still been with capable if not equal talents. The more I think about it, MacT was a bad coach, he couldn't even get the best line-up out there never mind getting the best out of HIS line-up. Could of had a 1a and 1b two to three years ago.

SRB - What? Hypothetically, I have no idea what your talking about. Are we still talking about Schremp? This year or then? What?

Way to wreck a good conversation Paq. *walks off into sunset shaking head*

GM -Hahahahahahah. agreed! *rides off on his Harley with a chick on the back*

PT - I never once made any references to this year. I was always talking about past blunders. My whole focus was Schremp and that we never gave him a chance.  This year hasn't officially begun, so I could have only really ever been talking about past years. We don't have the same kind of team now that we had then. I guess my point is that today's waiving and subsequent loss of Rob Schremp could have been avoided if he was given half a chance, with players that would work, when we had said players. But if you guys can't follow me I'll try not to confuse you anymore, besides what's done is done and ain't no amount of debating chances and abilities is going to change it.

I guess we'll disagree to disagree on this one. Guys?  *just realizes no one is here anymore*

------------

Do you want in on this "secret" meeting?  We have them all the time and we could use more than two rounds.  Be friends with me on facebook and join the fun.  www.facebook.com/smokinrayburnt

2 comments:

  1. This is one of the best things i've read in a long time. Very funny.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This shit is crazy!!!

    ReplyDelete

OilersJambalaya.com is in no way, shape or form associated with the Edmonton Oilers, Oklahoma City Barons and the Bakersfield Condors. This is a fans blog for fans. We happen to love those teams, so we write about them.