Trevor Timmins Part II

[bsl]

The AHL level is for sure a problem, you don't need much info to figure this one out. The mountain of evidence starts here: the players that we really need to take from junior to NHL level don't play enough. Case in point: Nikita Scherbak, should play 25 mins every night, until he wants to cry. It's not just Scherbak, they screwed with Leblanc, Hudon, momentums in the same way. This organisation consistently confuses the need for accountability with the mission of success. Instead, It looks like the mission itself is accountability (do I really need to explain why this is wrong?).

At the scouting level, Timmins has to be better, but we also need to have more guts at the GM level to make the trades that returns good picks when we have to. For example. we are about to lose 100% of the assets value for Plekanec, Emelin, because of how Bergevin managed these situations. Instead of having legitimate holes in the lineup that would results in better picks by themselves, we have a constant "virtual" sensation of being "contending" because the core of the team is ok, but the support group is consistently dreadful. It's consistently dreadful, because we don't recycle assets very well (if at all). We also keep players around that should never touch the ice again(DD).

In a cap-era: the ****ing Redwings model is dead. Even them are saying it.
In a cap-era: rebuild for 2 years every 10 years. Create a wave with 2 consecutive top 5 picks (3 in case you have some bad luck)
In a cap-era: support your wave the best you can by concentrating the wave. Elements of the older waves (if you still have them) should NOT be kept over their expiration dates (unless they are exceptional: Markov).

Effectively, the Maples Leafs might pass us and the Bruins next year because they had the guts to do what is right.

You can work in my office any time.

Yeah I would hate to come away after 4 drafts with Price, Halak, Streit, and Emelin.

Two number one goalies (including the best in the world), a top pairing dman and a solid stay at home dman. What could be worse??? lol

Not sure if serious.

at some point the sword is going to need to drop on this guy. Very few home runs or consistent NHLers and not enough assets to deal in trades - ALSO his responsibility

Pretty much. Sorry guys but at 1 mill a year I'd be watching swede peewee games. I'd earn my money. Especially for Habs.

I get fired if I don't perform over 6 months. And what I do is harder than what Timmins does.

Ghallagher was his last gem. And that was 7 years ago.

He's been bad. Since 2007.

It's too early to judge 2013, 14, and 15+

There is no question that '08, '09, '10, and '11 was a horrible stretch.

Fact remains, however, that (if the Buck actually stops with him) Timmins is one of the best in the business at sourcing talent throughout the draft. We have, on average, the most games played per pick of any team in the NHL since TT joined us in '03. And I personally think it is a bit reductionist to suggest that the blame all falls on his shoulders: that time frame has seen us have 4 different GM's, all of whom had differing approaches to the game.

I suspect TT would be one of the most sought after player personnel types in the NHL if he were to be on the open market...a reasonably strong sign when it comes to determining the value he adds to the organization.

Yeah he's great at drafting third liners. Don't see no cup.

 

[David Suzuki]

Pretty much. Sorry guys but at 1 mill a year I'd be watching swede peewee games. I'd earn my money. Especially for Habs.

I get fired if I don't perform over 6 months. And what I do is harder than what Timmins does.

Ghallagher was his last gem. And that was 7 years ago.

He's been bad. Since 2007.

How can you possibly sit there and say what you do is harder then what he does when you have never done his job? This board is losing its mind...

 

[bsl]

Too early to write Fucale off,

Not sure if serious.

How can you possibly sit there and say what you do is harder then what he does when you have never done his job? This board is losing its mind...

What I do is much harder than what he does. What you do is much harder than he does. End of.

I can get torched in 2 weeks if I **** up a 200 million dollar building.

I am accountable.

But it's not about me. It's about Timmins and he has been average for 8 years.

Average scouting is not going to cut it for the Montreal canadiens. They should have brilliant scouting.

That's my opinion and I stay with it.

 

[David Suzuki]

What I do is much harder than he does. End of.

But it's not about me. It's about Timmins and he has been average for 8 years.

Average scouting is not going to cut it for the Montreal canadiens. They should have brilliant scouting.

That's my opinion and I stay with it.

and I would argue a firefighters job is likely "harder" than timmins' doesn't make him or her qualified for this job

You pretty much tried to make it about you by

 

[bsl]

and I would argue a firefighters job is likely "harder" than timmins' doesn't make him or her qualified for this job

You pretty much tried to make it about you by

Trevor Timmins has one of the greatest positions in pro sport. In the world. He is head scout for the Montreal canadiens. I expect him to achieve or someone can replace him.

He should be absolutely elite.

 

[Deluded Puck]

He's ok but made to look worse than he is by a terrible AHL Coach and a NHL coach who distrusts younger players.

 

[Toene]

He seem to be good at finding talent in mid-rounds. 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc. Last year was a good draft, cant wait to go see Bitten and Mete in Laval.

 

[Sorinth]

the Jared Tinordi draft is the one that kills me.

That year we had 5 picks only one of which was in first three rounds and walked away from that draft with a top-6 winger. I'm not sure how that can be considered a bad draft. Had we drafted Gallagher with our 1st round pick and Tinordi with our 5th I don't think people would have much of an issue with that year.

 

[Whitesnake]

That year we had 5 picks only one of which was in first three rounds and walked away from that draft with a top-6 winger. I'm not sure how that can be considered a bad draft. Had we drafted Gallagher with our 1st round pick and Tinordi with our 5th I don't think people would have much of an issue with that year.

Nah, not the way to see it. Gallagher was NEVER in the works for a pick in the 1st round. So there was no way we'd do that. Gallagher, like tons of players, were steal material and for once since 2008, something Timmins used to do much more before, he was able to be ours. So being a great scout, actually being THE BEST, as I often see in here, is not only be able to be very very good with your 1st rounders, where statistically the best players come from, but also able to find gems later. Most people agree that Timmins was very very good prior to 2008. False is the idea that you need to be PERFECT has he ALSO wasn't perfect during those years, from Kostitsyn to Chipchura to Fischer. But he had some very good picks along the way.

And again, while having not a lot of picks do not help, it's false that you can't make a bang with 5 picks either. Having only 5 picks does NOT make him having to choose Tinordi instead of Kuznetsov. If he was able to get Gallagher....he would have been able to get Kuznetsov. He also could have gotten Klingberg instead of Ellis etc. Not expecting him to be 100% everytime. But the whole "but he only had 5 picks" does not work for me as far as finding quality is concerned.

 

[Sorinth]

Nah, not the way to see it. Gallagher was NEVER in the works for a pick in the 1st round. So there was no way we'd do that. Gallagher, like tons of players, were steal material and for once since 2008, something Timmins used to do much more before, he was able to be ours. So being a great scout, actually being THE BEST, as I often see in here, is not only be able to be very very good with your 1st rounders, where statistically the best players come from, but also able to find gems later. Most people agree that Timmins was very very good prior to 2008. False is the idea that you need to be PERFECT has he ALSO wasn't perfect during those years, from Kostitsyn to Chipchura to Fischer. But he had some very good picks along the way.

And again, while having not a lot of picks do not help, it's false that you can't make a bang with 5 picks either. Having only 5 picks does NOT make him having to choose Tinordi instead of Kuznetsov. If he was able to get Gallagher....he would have been able to get Kuznetsov. He also could have gotten Klingberg instead of Ellis etc. Not expecting him to be 100% everytime. But the whole "but he only had 5 picks" does not work for me as far as finding quality is concerned.

If we got a top-6 winger with our 1st round pick, and got nothing with the late picks it's doubtful people would consider it a bad draft. It's the fact that people feel we missed out that makes it seem like a bad draft. But in the end it doesn't matter where an individual player gets drafted, what matters is who you have at the end of the draft.

The number and quality of picks has an effect on what expectations should be for the draft. As you said the vast majority of top players are with those early picks so having 5 picks, only one in the top 3 rounds makes it extremely hard to make a bang. It's why for instance 2012 should probably be considered a bad draft despite getting Galchenyuk, we had a number of other relatively good picks so only coming away with 1 player is a dissapointment. Though if Hudon becomes a top-6 guy then the draft would be "saved".

You say you don't expect him to be 100%, but when you have 1 high pick and then a bunch of late picks, it becomes very much a pass/fail situation. Either you made the right call with that one pick, or you walk away with nothing. Using Scott Cullen's draft value, the remaining picks that year gave us an 11.7% chance at getting a top-6/top-4 player. So screw up that one pick up like we did and 9 out of 10 times you have no players at all from that draft year.

And since no team got Kuznetsov, Klingberg, and Gallagher despite virtually all of them having that chance I guess that means none of the other teams/scouts can be considered the best either. If you don't think Timmins is one of the best, then please tell us who is so we can go through each pick they made and find every good player they missed out on and use it as proof he isn't one of the best

 

[Whitesnake]

If we got a top-6 winger with our 1st round pick, and got nothing with the late picks it's doubtful people would consider it a bad draft. It's the fact that people feel we missed out that makes it seem like a bad draft. But in the end it doesn't matter where an individual player gets drafted, what matters is who you have at the end of the draft.

The number and quality of picks has an effect on what expectations should be for the draft. As you said the vast majority of top players are with those early picks so having 5 picks, only one in the top 3 rounds makes it extremely hard to make a bang. It's why for instance 2012 should probably be considered a bad draft despite getting Galchenyuk, we had a number of other relatively good picks so only coming away with 1 player is a dissapointment. Though if Hudon becomes a top-6 guy then the draft would be "saved".

You say you don't expect him to be 100%, but when you have 1 high pick and then a bunch of late picks, it becomes very much a pass/fail situation. Either you made the right call with that one pick, or you walk away with nothing. Using Scott Cullen's draft value, the remaining picks that year gave us an 11.7% chance at getting a top-6/top-4 player. So screw up that one pick up like we did and 9 out of 10 times you have no players at all from that draft year.

And since no team got Kuznetsov, Klingberg, and Gallagher despite virtually all of them having that chance I guess that means none of the other teams/scouts can be considered the best either. If you don't think Timmins is one of the best, then please tell us who is so we can go through each pick they made and find every good player they missed out on and use it as proof he isn't one of the best

I personnally never believe in throwing out "the best" out there in that regard. Tough to do so too, as to do so, you would have to make a research and find out for each team, who was there as chances are, most teams have replaced their head scout at one point. So it was never about naming one or ther other better than Timmins, it's to just stop to shout BETTER for Timmins as if we were still in 2007. I just think that people should start differentiating a good pick from a good draft. I say that a draft is good when you have more than 1 guy coming out of it. Yet, while I might a draft was average, I still can recognize that a pick was great. And for me, again, a great draft, does not have to mean that every player sees the NHL light. But you have to expect that it has to be very close to what the average of a draft is. You would need top players in there. And some nice fillers. But there will be misses as the draft, mostly towards the end, are made of boom or bust picks that serve that purpose. What I would like to see from those boom or bust picks though would be offensive players. Guys like Korostelev. Sokolov. Athanasiou. Guys that have some serious issues....but that one issue that they don't have is the knack for the net.

Anyway, to each their own. There might not be wrong answers. I just want to have the "luxury" to have my own opinion. And my own opinin is that he's been average to say the least since 2008. And for whoever aren't "trends" fans....well look away. There is one problem though....stats uses trends for EVERYTHING. Not sure why we can't use it for scouting. And not sure why hoping we fix a few things there also means that we hate the guy and think he's the worst thing of this whole organizatoin. I actually said not that long ago that he might be the best thing....but that was mostly made out of my bad opinions on everything else.

Just that at one point.....maybe it's time for a change...IF there is somebody better out there. And one other thing....I would love to know the real impact of Shane Churla 'cause that one....I,m not too sure about.

 

[WeThreeKings]

That year we had 5 picks only one of which was in first three rounds and walked away from that draft with a top-6 winger. I'm not sure how that can be considered a bad draft. Had we drafted Gallagher with our 1st round pick and Tinordi with our 5th I don't think people would have much of an issue with that year.

We were giving away 2nd round picks that tenure like candy. We moved another one to move up to draft a player with 0 puck skills. All while Kuznetsov was available.

 

[Sorinth]

I personnally never believe in throwing out "the best" out there in that regard. Tough to do so too, as to do so, you would have to make a research and find out for each team, who was there as chances are, most teams have replaced their head scout at one point. So it was never about naming one or ther other better than Timmins, it's to just stop to shout BETTER for Timmins as if we were still in 2007. I just think that people should start differentiating a good pick from a good draft.

Well if the point of your posts are to say Timmins isn't one of the best, but you don't actually do any analysis comparing him to others then it seems like hating on the guy just for the sake of it.

I say that a draft is good when you have more than 1 guy coming out of it. Yet, while I might a draft was average, I still can recognize that a pick was great. And for me, again, a great draft, does not have to mean that every player sees the NHL light. But you have to expect that it has to be very close to what the average of a draft is.

Well that was kind of my point. The Tinordi pick (22nd) has historically (1990-2009) netted a top-6/top-4 player 20% of the time. So if we were comparing Timmins to the average there should be quite a few misses in the top round.

If we use 2012 as the last year where we can judge the picks his 1st round looks like this

Pick Range League Average Timmins Timmins since 07
1-3 85% 1/1 1/1
4-6 50% 1/1 -/-
7-9 27% -/- -/-
10-12 25% 1/2 -/-
13-15 30% -/- -/-
16-18 19% 0/3 0/2*
19-21 23% 0/1 -/-
22-24 27% 1/2 0/1
25-27 18% -/- -/-
28-30 10% -/- -/-

*I don't consider Beaulieu a top-4 D as of now. But those that do should adjust the numbers accordingly.

So I can understand why people are dissapointed with his 1st round picks since 07, but looking at it realistically he had a 50/50 chance of getting an impact player with those 3 picks and didn't. To me that's not a big deal, if he's 0/3 with McCarron/Sherback/Juulsen then it would be a big concern.

You would need top players in there. And some nice fillers. But there will be misses as the draft, mostly towards the end, are made of boom or bust picks that serve that purpose. What I would like to see from those boom or bust picks though would be offensive players. Guys like Korostelev. Sokolov. Athanasiou. Guys that have some serious issues....but that one issue that they don't have is the knack for the net.

I think that's the difference, I don't expect the misses to be mostly towards the end. I fully expect there to be a bunch of misses with 1st round picks as well. Especially outside of the top-5.

Anyway, to each their own. There might not be wrong answers. I just want to have the "luxury" to have my own opinion. And my own opinin is that he's been average to say the least since 2008. And for whoever aren't "trends" fans....well look away. There is one problem though....stats uses trends for EVERYTHING. Not sure why we can't use it for scouting. And not sure why hoping we fix a few things there also means that we hate the guy and think he's the worst thing of this whole organizatoin. I actually said not that long ago that he might be the best thing....but that was mostly made out of my bad opinions on everything else.

Just that at one point.....maybe it's time for a change...IF there is somebody better out there. And one other thing....I would love to know the real impact of Shane Churla 'cause that one....I,m not too sure about.

Has anyone said you can have your own opinion? You can have an opinion just like others can have the opinion that you are wrong.

As for trends, the problem is sample size, your trend of bad 1st round picks is 3 picks. It's very hard to claim there is a trend off of so few data points.

The real issue for a GM is he can't just take the wait and see approach, because you don't want a "bad" scout to be there picking for the next 5 years while you wait and see how the current crop do.

 

[covfefe]

This is a Timmins thread. So we're discussing him. NOBODY says that ALL the blame goes to him. But he has to take some responsability. And I don't believe that "most games played" means a whole lot. At one point, guys that were just fillers ended up not playing a key role and were discarded. And quite a few guys we got through trades are playing just as good as role as guys we ended up picking. Chipchura or Torrey Mitchell? One was picked in the 1st round. The other was received for a 5th rounder.

Again, what you need out of a draft is quality. When Bergevin keeps whining that he can't get top players that easily, what he means, and what he says is that you need to get those players through draft. That's what the draft is for. And yes, in a salary cap era, you also need a few fillers so that you don't necessarily have to spend 3M$ on a filler. But most likely, you are looking for stars. We ended up building this team because of 4 picks in Timmins tenure. Price, Subban, Pacioretty and....McDonagh. I count him for himself and not for the return as Timmins has nothing to do with that unless he said to go ahead with the deal and rumor has it that it's totally the opposite. And lately, the team is greatly helped by Galchenyuk and Gallagher. And remains to be seen what the future holds for Lehkonen as a possible top 6. But we need to do better. Because Timmins can and proved it in the past. But going solely with numbers, while it might tell you that it proves Timmins can recognize NHL talent.....it doesn't mean that in the end, it's really helping the team at going forward. Last 3 drafts will help shape whatever we all think of him.

Since you are more interested in the qualitative side of things, Habs players' avg. points/pick since '03:

And the aforementioned GP/pick chart:

See how there are a few teams that are consistently at the top of both of those charts?

Yeah he's great at drafting third liners. Don't see no cup.

I think you "don't see no cup" because we have not built good enough teams with strong enough pieces at key positions. Timmins is not infallible, but it is not logically sound, on any level, to gauge his performance by # of Stanley Cups won. Given the repeated references to a big boy job, I suspect you'll understand how and why that follows.

Please note that I too would like to see us draft more 1st and 2nd liners...don't see a personnel change accomplishing anything to that end, though.

 

[Whitesnake]

Since you are more interested in the qualitative side of things, Habs players' avg. points/pick since '03:

And the aforementioned GP/pick chart:

See how there are a few teams that are consistently at the top of both of those charts?

Awesome. So he's not the best. But amongst a top 10. AND this is since 2003. Which was never discuted. But somehow, while some think we shouldn't talk about trends since 2008 because it's unfair to Timmins, they totally disregarded that since 2003, the same head scout was probably not there for every single team, yet somehow let's forget to talk about that.

 

[montreal]

looks like the link I posted didn't work so here is the correct one,

https://habsterix.com/2016/12/26/demistifying-the-work-of-trevor-timmins/

this is what stood out the most to me,

let’s take the average of the number of games played by the players drafted by each team, divided by the number of draft picks they have taken overall.

Team GP/DP
1. Habs 85.53
2. boston 85.27
3. SJ 84.9
4. Pitt 84.72
5. LA 81.24

it's a point I have been trying to make although some don't want to hear it.

 

[DAChampion]

But somehow, while some think we shouldn't talk about trends since 2008 because it's unfair to Timmins, they totally disregarded that since 2003, the same head scout was probably not there for every single team, yet somehow let's forget to talk about that.

Because it's not relevant.

We judge Timmins against the average of the NHL, not against specific head scouts.

If you want to judge a specific head scout, judge him against all others, against the distribution.

 

[Whitesnake]

Because it's not relevant.

We judge Timmins against the average of the NHL, not against specific head scouts.

If you want to judge a specific head scout, judge him against all others, against the distribution.

Fine. So it's then fine to talk about trends then. You can't have it both ways just because it fix your argumentation. If everything is fair, let's talk about trends too.

 

[Whitesnake]

looks like the link I posted didn't work so here is the correct one,

https://habsterix.com/2016/12/26/demistifying-the-work-of-trevor-timmins/

this is what stood out the most to me,





it's a point I have been trying to make although some don't want to hear it.

Well nobody disputed numbers prior to 2008. And nobody says that Timmins cannot recognize NHL talent. But main point is 2008 and up.

And then if you look at the exact same list you are talking about, and you take the Habs....and the Jets. The first team in the list, and the last one, since 2008, what it gives us is this:

JETS
Scheifele, Lowry, Trouba, Hellybuyck, Copp, Morrissey, Petan, Ehlers, Laine, and quite a few guys incoming like Connor, Roslovic and so on. And that's solely till 2011. But in that list, they have quite a few high picks compared to Habs.

HABS
Gallagher, Beaulieu, Galchenyuk, Lehkonen, McCarron, Ghetto, DLR. And a few guys incoming too like Sergachev, Juulsen, maybe Scherbak.

So while by looking at the list you are referring to, there is a difference between both teams....we can safely say that Winnipeg looks much better right now prospect wise. And while again they did benefitate from higher picks, they also only started drafting in 2011. So they don't have 2008, 2009 and 2010.

 

[montreal]

Well nobody disputed numbers prior to 2008. And nobody says that Timmins cannot recognize NHL talent. But main point is 2008 and up.

And then if you look at the exact same list you are talking about, and you take the Habs....and the Jets. The first team in the list, and the last one, since 2008, what it gives us is this:

JETS
Scheifele, Lowry, Trouba, Hellybuyck, Copp, Morrissey, Petan, Ehlers, Laine, and quite a few guys incoming like Connor, Roslovic and so on. And that's solely till 2011. But in that list, they have quite a few high picks compared to Habs.

HABS
Gallagher, Beaulieu, Galchenyuk, Lehkonen, McCarron, Ghetto, DLR. And a few guys incoming too like Sergachev, Juulsen, maybe Scherbak.

So while by looking at the list you are referring to, there is a difference between both teams....we can safely say that Winnipeg looks much better right now prospect wise. And while again they did benefitate from higher picks, they also only started drafting in 2011. So they don't have 2008, 2009 and 2010.

So compare Timmins top 9 picks to the Jets. Price, Galchenyuk, Sergachev. Looks like the Habs should get Timmins more top 9 picks as he seems to do pretty good there.

Either way, take the average of the number of games played by the players drafted by each team, divided by the number of draft picks they have taken overall and the Habs are #1 in the league.

 

[DAChampion]

30 men were drafted from the 2nd round of the 2013 NHL entry drafted.

The Habs have the 1st, and 3rd best players right now in terms of number of games played.

Point being: it's hard to assess to Timmins' drafting during the Bergevin era, as it's simply too early to have a reliable and significant sample.

 

[Rapala]

looks like the link I posted didn't work so here is the correct one,

https://habsterix.com/2016/12/26/demistifying-the-work-of-trevor-timmins/

this is what stood out the most to me,





it's a point I have been trying to make although some don't want to hear it.

It was too hard to attempt understanding ratings based soley on that.
What about level of performance?
What about Injuries?

 

[Whitesnake]

30 men were drafted from the 2nd round of the 2013 NHL entry drafted.

The Habs have the 1st, and 3rd best players right now in terms of number of games played.

Based on that, what you are saying is that, let say by looking at the 3rd round, where we have also 3rd guy with the most games played...that would not traded Andrighetto for Buchnevich? You wouldn't trade Ghetto for Guentzel? Or Bjorkstrand? Solely based on games played?

And in the 2nd round, you are telling me that you wouldn't trade DLR for Compher because the latter still didn't play in the NHL yet? Games played is often misleading and in no way a reason to prefer a player over another. That analysis can be made once their career is done....but other than that, as of now, it's irrelevant.

Games played for the Habs lately is often irrelevant based on the fact that as a team, we probably have the most injuries for the last 2 years. Are those players playing because they deserve it and are already permanent fixtures and important players for years to come? Or they just played 'cause we had no choice and had to play them because of injuries?

 

[Habs100]

That year we had 5 picks only one of which was in first three rounds and walked away from that draft with a top-6 winger. I'm not sure how that can be considered a bad draft. Had we drafted Gallagher with our 1st round pick and Tinordi with our 5th I don't think people would have much of an issue with that year.

Exactly. Plus, at that time we had to get bigger, because of the way the game was being played. I'm not sure Tinordi doesn't make the NHL if the game was still being played as it was then.

 

[DAChampion]

Based on that, what you are saying is that, let say by looking at the 3rd round, where we have also 3rd guy with the most games played...that would not traded Andrighetto for Buchnevich? You wouldn't trade Ghetto for Guentzel? Or Bjorkstrand? Solely based on games played?

And in the 2nd round, you are telling me that you wouldn't trade DLR for Compher because the latter still didn't play in the NHL yet? Games played is often misleading and in no way a reason to prefer a player over another. That analysis can be made once their career is done....but other than that, as of now, it's irrelevant.

Games played for the Habs lately is often irrelevant based on the fact that as a team, we probably have the most injuries for the last 2 years. Are those players playing because they deserve it and are already permanent fixtures and important players for years to come? Or they just played 'cause we had no choice and had to play them because of injuries?

I wrote what I meant.

It's too early to judge the Bergevin-era Timmins drafts.

A year ago Lehkonen was mostly a joke around here.