Trevor Timmins Part II

[scrubadam]

I'm not sure they have any forward prospects with top 6 potential. But what can you expect? You only have a good chance of getting a player of such caliber if you draft high, which this organization has done twice in the last decade because they're content to simply make the playoffs, win a round or two and draft a future 3rd line player in the bottom half of the draft. No vision.

Zajac/Giroux/Kopitar(but lucky not to take Brule)/M. Johansson/Kuznetzov.

This is the C's we missed since TT began. So either its across 3 GM's and 2 Owners, or we maybe look at the scouting department. 4 C's taken after Serge in last years draft within 6 picks. Will the habs be kicking themselves for missing out on another C.

The team needs to make it an organizational mandate to draft the best C in every draft.

 

[1909]

Zajac/Giroux/Kopitar(but lucky not to take Brule)/M. Johansson/Kuznetzov.

This is the C's we missed since TT began. So either its across 3 GM's and 2 Owners, or we maybe look at the scouting department. 4 C's taken after Serge in last years draft within 6 picks. Will the habs be kicking themselves for missing out on another C.

The team needs to make it an organizational mandate to draft the best C in every draft.

best C or a pure sniper with size.

 

[Belial]

Zajac/Giroux/Kopitar(but lucky not to take Brule)/M. Johansson/Kuznetzov.

This is the C's we missed since TT began. So either its across 3 GM's and 2 Owners, or we maybe look at the scouting department. 4 C's taken after Serge in last years draft within 6 picks. Will the habs be kicking themselves for missing out on another C.

The team needs to make it an organizational mandate to draft the best C in every draft.

There are a lot more good centers that we missed! Only in 2010, we missed on Hayes, Kuznetsov, Coyle and Nelson all drafted within the next 8 picks after we picked the amazing Tinordi!

 

[1909]

There are a lot more good centers that we missed! Only in 2010, we missed on Hayes, Kuznetsov, Coyle and Nelson all drafted within the next 8 picks after we picked the amazing Tinordi!

They were afraid, like many other teams, that he would never come to the NHL and stay in the KHL.

 

[scrubadam]

There are a lot more good centers that we missed! Only in 2010, we missed on Hayes, Kuznetsov, Coyle and Nelson all drafted within the next 8 picks after we picked the amazing Tinordi!

And then we wonder why we don't have a 1C. You get them in the draft. And if your scout is finding them and taking lesser players over those C then you have to make lateral moves by trading valuable assets.

For a team searching for that 1C they don't seem to be looking very hard.

 

[Belial]

They were afraid, like many other teams, that he would never come to the NHL and stay in the KHL.

Ok let's say they were afraid to pick Kuznetsov.

Hayes has 43 points in 59 games this season playing center with the Rangers.
Coyle has 44 points in 62 games, he plays wing because they're loaded at center but he's a center.
Nelson has 34 points in 62 games playing center behind Tavares with the Islanders...

It would help us a lot having any of those guys...

 

[OnceWasNot]

Zajac/Giroux/Kopitar(but lucky not to take Brule)/M. Johansson/Kuznetzov.

This is the C's we missed since TT began. So either its across 3 GM's and 2 Owners, or we maybe look at the scouting department. 4 C's taken after Serge in last years draft within 6 picks. Will the habs be kicking themselves for missing out on another C.

The team needs to make it an organizational mandate to draft the best C in every draft.

I don't disagree. Timmins has been really bad. But centers in the 15 - 30 range are more likely to become third liners than impact players. This organization needs more top 10 picks, and they need to use them to draft centers.

 

[Sorinth]

Yeah, there are surely bosses that look at what you did 10 years ago to tell you how great you are right now. Would love to meet those. But most of them, will indeed assess overall performance....but they might have use a shorter period of time to assess it. And while you can't judge a head scout exactly the same way you'd just a salesman, you STILL need results and you WON'T drool over something that happens 10 years ago.

So you're saying a normal boss doesn't care what great things you did 10 years ago, but would care about mistakes made 8 & 9 years ago? I mean seriously if they don't care about the 07 because it's so far in the past, why would they care about the 08-09 drafts?

Either they'll judge you on the whole body of work (03+), the time they were your boss (2012+) or just look at the very recent drafts (2015+).

Also something rarely brought up is undrafted FAs that we sign. Surely Timmins had a big say in signing McNiven who's looking like a great pickup. Desharnais for all his faults was a success from a scouting/development standpoint. Shouldn't guys like this also be attributed to Timmins?

Are you sure that the same person that wants to get more 1st rounder ALSO are fine with tanking? 'Cause how do you get 1st rounder without selling? And yep, a 2012 draft will, in my mind, be looked as worse than the 2010 draft for the reasons you mentioned. Never said the contrary. Actually, 2013 might be heading towards an even worse draft because of also the same reason and because contrary to 2012, we won't have drafted a key player in this. All hope are on Lehkonen right now.

I can't speak for everyone, but yes I'm fine with tanking at the right times. I'd also point out that it's not just tanking that gets you extra picks. We traded Rivet for that extra 1st while still going for the playoffs. Had we not signed Plekanec to his extension last year we could have potentially gotten a 1st for him last year, etc...

It's as much about the GM recognizing when it's time to move on from a player that still has some value.

People keep whining about Timmins not having enough picks to work with and yet in 2012 and 2013, he's had 11 top 100 picks. 7 top 60 picks. And as of now, we have 1 great NHL'er. 1 kid that maybe goes that direction in Lehkonen. And no other key players from it.

Well we still don't know how it will all work out. Is Hudon going to make the NHL, and will he be a top-6 player? I'd say there's still a good chance of that. McCarron also still has top-6 potential. De La Rose is likely to be an NHLer.

We likely have 6 NHLers from those 2 drafts, all but one of those 6 still has top-6 potential. It's doubtful they all reach that potential but it would not surprise me if we end up with 3 top-6 players, and 3 bottom-6 players from those two drafts. I would consider that a pretty good couple of years.

Just like 2006, 4 top 70 picks with only Ryan White to show for. Sure, 2008 was a disaster to begin with, strangely they decided to go the ultimate boom or bust picks despite not having a lot to work with. Quailer who was incredibly raw with no real indication as to where this guy was going, Missiaen this giant goalie of a man that was also incredibly raw, Trunev this little midget star that could etc. But yeah, not enough picks to work with for sure.

With how low the odds of even a mid 1st round pick are, it's going to happen that there are just some drafts where everything misses and others where seemingly everything is a hit. Just like a top goal scorer will score 3 goals one game and then go 3 games without scoring. It's the nature of low percentages and few data points, there won't be a nice constant distribution. That's why it's important to look at all the drafts, so that you can get a clear picture and see how good/bad he really has been. Focusing on a few drafts whether great drafts or bad ones will give a false impression.

As far as your last questions, well 2 picks out of top 30 makes me expecting NHL'ers. And at least 1 very good one. ESPECIALLY since I'm being told we have THE BEST in the business.....I have to know what differentiate the best from the others if it's not his ability to have a better "percentage" than what you keep giving us. If the percentage is suppose to reflect the "average" well it means that DA BEST will have greater number no? So that's my expectations. And based on his past, mostly pre 2007, I'm expecting that he finds us some gems à la Gallagher with his other picks. That's what the expectations of THE BEST has to be.

Well those two 1st have about a 20% chance each of becoming a top-6 player / top-4 defenceman. The other picks are at ~3%. So even if by being the best he's twice as good as the average and so those %s become 40% and 6%. So at twice as good we are still only expecting 1-2 good NHLer. And we arguably did get 2 (Gallagher, Beaulieu). So is being twice as good as the average not enough to be considered one of the best?

Oh and enough excuses with the Bozon and Reway "illness". In NO WAY were those 2 pencilled to be great NHL'ers. So easy to say that they were "just" slowed down by this and they were....but IN NO WAY should it be put in the "Oh but they would have surely made it if it wouldn't have been because of their illness" category. You don't want them to be talked in the fail category? Fine. Don't add them in the "great picks" category either.

I've never used illness/injury as an excuse, especially since it happens to other teams prospects as well.

Not sure who said that the guy needs to be 1.000. I mean, the 2007 draft that ALL OF US keep raving about still shows that he didn't hit every single pick he made, so moot point. Not sure when we disregard what he has done before 2007. Not sure why when people bring what he has done after, we are told what he has done before. That would be like saying that Scott Gomez is a great NHL'er right now 'cause he had numerous 60 point and more seasons in the past. People aren't saying that HIS ENTIRE CAREER IS FAIL. People might just be evaluating that recently, he has struggled. I have no idea why we can't do that. That's like the whiners with their "where are the haters" now stupid posts whenever a guy who DOES struggle finally scores a goal. It's not because he scored that he did not struggle before. Well for Timmins, it's not because he had a great 2007 draft that he STILL has great drafts.

So which RECENT drafts are considered failures? Do you consider 2016 to be a failure? What about 2015?

 

[Whitesnake]

So you're saying a normal boss doesn't care what great things you did 10 years ago, but would care about mistakes made 8 & 9 years ago? I mean seriously if they don't care about the 07 because it's so far in the past, why would they care about the 08-09 drafts?

Either they'll judge you on the whole body of work (03+), the time they were your boss (2012+) or just look at the very recent drafts (2015+).

Also something rarely brought up is undrafted FAs that we sign. Surely Timmins had a big say in signing McNiven who's looking like a great pickup. Desharnais for all his faults was a success from a scouting/development standpoint. Shouldn't guys like this also be attributed to Timmins?

8 or 9 years ago? Well 9 years ago is 2008....8 years ago... is 2009....how about 2010...2011....what seems to be 2012.....what looks like 2013..... do you think that right now they are also please with Scherbak's development while it's still need to be determined...but what is their first assessment on him you think? Why do you talk about 8 or 9 years ago?

And again, why is a head scout judged differently then players or coaches? In a sense that you either judge him since they START of your career or only since their boss was appointed? Tell me you never beleive in trends then or NEVER used that for any type of jobs. Something I doubt.

The idea is that when it's time to try to figure out why a team lacks depth and quality, you try to find the reasons. Right now, in our regular lineup, we have Galchenyuk, Pacioretty, Gallagher, Lehkonen, McCarron and Beaulieu from the Timmins era that are left. As of THIS PRESENT MOMENT, when we had to acquire 5 guys or so to build a depth, you cannot say that everyboyd in that list is pulling their weight. For various reasons, 1st season from Lehkonen, still doing the little things but you have to expect more from a top 6 player, McCarron will be out of the lineup soon again, Beaulieu from gret to worst 6 years after being drafted.....the reasons are multiple. From lack of picks....but ALSO to lack of great work by the scouting group, Timmins being in charge of it.

So when the drafting idea is to be able to find guys you can't find anywhere else and it's tough...well they have to be judged for it at one point. So it's awesome to have been able to find all those guys in 2007, but while it's tough to repeat, you need a certain amount of picks as regularly as possible so you grow, either from keeping those players or trading them.

FA signings? Sure. We'll have to wait and see how that develops, strangely, you have to wonder why they didn't pick them in the first place even in the 7th round, and we also know how many they have missed.....but yeah, I do attribute McNiven to him. Again, no idea why they took the chance to not pick him in the first place. When I first saw the guy at the dev. camp, it was a gimme that he should have been picked. But they got him. Kudos to him. I'd attribute Lindgren to him too. Even if it might be a combination of a lot of people....you have to think that he'd knew him too. But we have to wait till it transforms into NHL success. 'Cause that's the only goal.

Well we still don't know how it will all work out. Is Hudon going to make the NHL, and will he be a top-6 player? I'd say there's still a good chance of that. McCarron also still has top-6 potential. De La Rose is likely to be an NHLer.

An evaluation of a "good chance" at making it does not mean it is. For Hudon, he's gonig through waivers next year, so we actually have the end of the year, and the preseason and if you want a whole season of being a #13th forward to know if he can be a valuable player. I guess we'll see. McCarron? Come on man....no way will he ever come close to top 6. But I guess we'll stick with that...and when we'll talk about that in 3 or 4 years, I'll be called out for "hindisighting" and probably be reminded about the 2007 draft yet again....thank 2016 does look promising. DLR...yeah, he could be....still you are suppose to use high picks for something you can't get any other way. So if DLR becomes "a NHL'er", let's hope he becomes a AHL'er first.

Well those two 1st have about a 20% chance each of becoming a top-6 player / top-4 defenceman. The other picks are at ~3%. So even if by being the best he's twice as good as the average and so those %s become 40% and 6%. So at twice as good we are still only expecting 1-2 good NHLer. And we arguably did get 2 (Gallagher, Beaulieu). So is being twice as good as the average not enough to be considered one of the best?

Nah because the average you keep talking about is just that...an average...which means that you can indeed strike out for a few picks.....but you are suppose to also hit that homerun at one point. And it's also opportunistic to keep talking about those stats as we all know that they are lowered by quite a few pathetic scouting group that were there and are still there. Thank god nobody said that Timmins was pathetic. It was never the point to begin with. This whole "Let,s save Timmins" campaign was mostly driven by people who were just saying how he struggled more since his great 2007 draft. That,s all. But somehow, you and some others had to come in its defense with things like "but I'm sure he'll be top 6" which buys you time so that when he isn't....you might be lucky enough so that future drafts brings us the top 6 we want. As of now, what we REALLY have in our lineup past 2007 that are playing a key role are Galchy, Gally and Beaulieu. And right now, what are we seeing from Gallagher? Simply an off-year? And Beaulieu...what will happen with him? Is he really showing top 4 material? That,s why there might be some criticisms towards him. And I think it,s deserved. Could that all changed? Of course it can. If as you say, the most opportunistic evluations happen, that this team is formed by Hudon, Lehkonen, McCarron, DLR, Audette, Scherbak, Bitten all top 9 players and Juulsen, Mete, Sergachev forming the top 4.....geez, you can start again elevating at god status if you want....but that remains to be seen.

So which RECENT drafts are considered failures? Do you consider 2016 to be a failure? What about 2015?

For starters....you do see why there's a debate between posters about Timmins? Don't look too far....re-read your question...."Which recents drafts are considered FAILURES". And you took the time to bold the statement you responded to, statement that was saying "he has struggled". So...who talks about failures? Struggling in your world means failure? Is it my english that it's not good? Maybe it is....I don't know...

Well "recent" draft in evaluting a scout's work is a draft when you actually have a great idea of how it will be....with maybe a little prediction here and there. So I have no idea why you ask me this as you know it's impossible to rate 2015 and 2016 for sure. Though, i,d predict you that we will get nothing out of Staum, Pezzetta, Henriksson and Vejdemo but that's just a guess. Bourque will probably be another Ellis/Dietz, but we'll see. But I think we will like the rest of the picks. Big fan of Addison...can't wait to seee how that translates later. But when you do look at 2014, 2013, 2012.....you do have a greater idea EVEN if it's not done yet. Well for some it is....you're probably not expecting either to see Koberstein not making it or Crisp, Reway or Grégoire or every single one of our 2012 picks except for Galchy and Hudon. But that happens, as you said...you can't 1.000. But then when you start at who might be able to play a KEY role for us, 'cause again, that's the key of a draft, players you can't get through UFA or trades....well while you see Mac, Hudon and whoever top 6, I don't. I see Scherbak as the only possiblity as top 6. And he has LONG way to go. And Lehkonen who could be but...maybe he will be best suited as a 3rd liner.

So as of now.....EVEN INCLUDING Scherbak, you are not looking at our prospect pool, in the AHL or Juniors and can be excited by the gunslinger that is sleeping down there. There's none. The only possible one is Scherbak. On D? Looks better with Mete, Juulsen and Sergachev. Remains to be seen about how high the first 2 should be going when we are pretty sure we got a #1/#2 in Sergie.....hopefully.

So recent in scouting...is not 1 or 2 years after. But it shouldn't go 10 years back either.

 

[calder candidate]

Every team have hit and miss. We had a combination of weak draft and lack of quality pick and yes some questionable choice... Maybe every team had the player Montreal pick ahead of the guy they got they didn't have the pick and end up having the best player fall to them... For every player that we missed there are almost 15 teams that also missed him earlier including the team that eventually pick him...
If we had the first pick would in 2012 would we have pick Yakupov, Murray or Galchenyuk? Or if Galchenyuk was picked would we have pick Grigorenko, Rielly, Lindholm, Trouba or Forsberg, there all lot of hat that missed with better pick.


I pretty sure there is a team and not every decision good or bad fall on Timmins it isn't just Timmins that failled it the entire team.

 

[Gomez91]

Zajac/Giroux/Kopitar(but lucky not to take Brule)/M. Johansson/Kuznetzov.

This is the C's we missed since TT began. So either its across 3 GM's and 2 Owners, or we maybe look at the scouting department. 4 C's taken after Serge in last years draft within 6 picks. Will the habs be kicking themselves for missing out on another C.

The team needs to make it an organizational mandate to draft the best C in every draft.

Tim Timmons lacks vision or is just a puppet to the organization. Missing on such players like your list above is terrible.

For starters....you do see why there's a debate between posters about Timmins? Don't look too far....re-read your question...."Which recents drafts are considered FAILURES". And you took the time to bold the statement you responded to, statement that was saying "he has struggled". So...who talks about failures? Struggling in your world means failure? Is it my english that it's not good? Maybe it is....I don't know...

Well "recent" draft in evaluting a scout's work is a draft when you actually have a great idea of how it will be....with maybe a little prediction here and there. So I have no idea why you ask me this as you know it's impossible to rate 2015 and 2016 for sure. Though, i,d predict you that we will get nothing out of Staum, Pezzetta, Henriksson and Vejdemo but that's just a guess. Bourque will probably be another Ellis/Dietz, but we'll see. But I think we will like the rest of the picks. Big fan of Addison...can't wait to seee how that translates later. But when you do look at 2014, 2013, 2012.....you do have a greater idea EVEN if it's not done yet. Well for some it is....you're probably not expecting either to see Koberstein not making it or Crisp, Reway or Grégoire or every single one of our 2012 picks except for Galchy and Hudon. But that happens, as you said...you can't 1.000. But then when you start at who might be able to play a KEY role for us, 'cause again, that's the key of a draft, players you can't get through UFA or trades....well while you see Mac, Hudon and whoever top 6, I don't. I see Scherbak as the only possiblity as top 6. And he has LONG way to go. And Lehkonen who could be but...maybe he will be best suited as a 3rd liner.

So as of now.....EVEN INCLUDING Scherbak, you are not looking at our prospect pool, in the AHL or Juniors and can be excited by the gunslinger that is sleeping down there. There's none. The only possible one is Scherbak. On D? Looks better with Mete, Juulsen and Sergachev. Remains to be seen about how high the first 2 should be going when we are pretty sure we got a #1/#2 in Sergie.....hopefully.

So recent in scouting...is not 1 or 2 years after. But it shouldn't go 10 years back either.

Well put Hudon I have a gut feeling could make it more so then Mac as for Juulsen or Sergachev or both I would package and trade for a young top line player Duchene. As for Tim Timmins I feel a fresh perspective is required with him or a replacement similar to what the Leafs have done exclude Matthews they seem to make more hits then misses.

 

[Whitesnake]

Every team have hit and miss. We had a combination of weak draft and lack of quality pick and yes some questionable choice... Maybe every team had the player Montreal pick ahead of the guy they got they didn't have the pick and end up having the best player fall to them... For every player that we missed there are almost 15 teams that also missed him earlier including the team that eventually pick him...
If we had the first pick would in 2012 would we have pick Yakupov, Murray or Galchenyuk? Or if Galchenyuk was picked would we have pick Grigorenko, Rielly, Lindholm, Trouba or Forsberg, there all lot of hat that missed with better pick.


I pretty sure there is a team and not every decision good or bad fall on Timmins it isn't just Timmins that failled it the entire team.

I don't know why people keep saying that...."but othe teams also make mistakes...so...". Yeah, okay, so let's not be too harsh on our team even if we don't win the Cup in the next 20 years, I'll tell you, TONS of other teams too won't win the Cup in the next 20 years. Not sure how it's suppose to make me feel better.

And the day that people start talking about Timmins as just another head scout that is no better or no worst than every other head scout....well maybe we should think at getting fresh new eyes. You still need to be sure that you get a guy who has very good credentials....but maybe it wouldn't be THAT dramatic after all.

 

[scrubadam]

Tim Timmons lacks vision or is just a puppet to the organization. Missing on such players like your list above is terrible.

You name made me think of something else. We take zajak or giroux and or kopitar no trade for gomez and habs still have McD.

All the time trying to get sundin lecaviler and gomez wasted because we cant draft a C. Almost threw away serge for Duchene this season. Thats what bad drafting does forces you to make bad trades.

 

[DesmondDekker]

Man do we lack depth at C. Timmins has never been able to draft one in more than 10 years. Galchenyuk is a lottery pick, and may never become more than a 1B due to his poor defensive game.

This year it's pretty apparent that the team would need a good 2nd line center to complement Galchenyuk offensively. We don't necessarily need a Kopitar/Kuznetsov type of C, but as another poster mentionned, a Hayes/Coyle would transform this team down the middle. It just sucks TT was never able to draft one through all the years. And the thing is, if he somehow drafts one someday, chances are that guy may never be ready to step in before Price starts declining.

So now it's on MB to fix this via trade / free agency / KHL / whatever it takes

 

[Frank Drebin]

What teams have drafted and developed better than Montreal?

Washington, Chicago, Anaheim, Tampa Bay I would think for sure?

 

[montreal]

You say its hard to fault him but even you weren't high on him. But I do think Leblanc was a bit of a political pick with the draft in MTL and all. But still TT should stand up if thats the case and show some backbone. My real issue with Tinordi/Leblanc is the players TT passed over that were selected almost right after. Same with Dieder/Dietz picks. I just don't like all the misses he has racked up since 07.

If the fanbase wants to excuse it and blame everyone else or hang onto his 07 draft then so be it. Personally I am less than impressed (and I know my opinion doesn't mean anything to the habs) and I feel his crappy drafts have been one of the leading reasons the habs lack depth up and down the line up. We can pile on MB for not making trades or signing UFA's but when you don't draft well everything else is more difficult. You have no pieces to trade, you have to hold onto the limited prospects you do have, and you are already blowing money on UFA's that you can't patch every hole or else you will blow the cap

I know for a fact that Timmins was high on Despres, so if Leblanc was political, then my guess is that Despres would have been their guy. I'm not saying there wasn't a lot of pressure to pick a local and it's not like Leblanc wasn't supposed to go around that spot and he was coming off a big year in the USHL.

Everyone has their own opinions but the fact most don't know what they are talking about. Who knows what goes on behind the scenes from the draft, to the development, the coaching, the players. To me the biggest issue is development, with Lefebvre having never coached a single playoff game to me is troubling. Now I don't know what impact it has, plus or minus as I'm sure Price would be Price without his outstanding Calder Cup run as a 19 year old out of juniors. But having never made the playoffs for any of our AHL prospects under Lefebvre should be at the very least concerning to all. With Timmins people bring up the well he did a great job but then didn't. It just don't make sense to me that people can admit he did a great job but now can't, like he forgot how to do so instead of looking at the lack of top 50 picks and then the issues of development and NOT see those as major red flags. I'm not saying Timmins doens't need to be better, I'm saying there are bigger issues that need fixing first.

 

[scrubadam]

I know for a fact that Timmins was high on Despres, so if Leblanc was political, then my guess is that Despres would have been their guy. I'm not saying there wasn't a lot of pressure to pick a local and it's not like Leblanc wasn't supposed to go around that spot and he was coming off a big year in the USHL.

Everyone has their own opinions but the fact most don't know what they are talking about. Who knows what goes on behind the scenes from the draft, to the development, the coaching, the players. To me the biggest issue is development, with Lefebvre having never coached a single playoff game to me is troubling. Now I don't know what impact it has, plus or minus as I'm sure Price would be Price without his outstanding Calder Cup run as a 19 year old out of juniors. But having never made the playoffs for any of our AHL prospects under Lefebvre should be at the very least concerning to all. With Timmins people bring up the well he did a great job but then didn't. It just don't make sense to me that people can admit he did a great job but now can't, like he forgot how to do so instead of looking at the lack of top 50 picks and then the issues of development and NOT see those as major red flags. I'm not saying Timmins doens't need to be better, I'm saying there are bigger issues that need fixing first.

To me the development excuse is a cop out, its passing the buck. And you are right we don't know everything so we judge on what we know which is the picks that TT took and the ones he missed nearly directly after his and we can see he took the wrong player. Thats what bothers me, not how he does in relation to other scouts, or Slys job but the fact that we can look back and call tons of players he chose wrongly on. If he is the best or one of the best he should be getting the RIGHT players.

Like I mentioned, Sly doesn't have a winning team but look at the numbers guys like Hudon/Ghetto/Beau/Scherback/Carr/ and to a lesser extent Mac have put up under him. All respectable AHL careers. So those players aren't langishing in the AHL they just aren't good enough to take the next step. And if we put it on Sly or lack of picks then how is it fair to give TT credit for his picks?

Lets look at his great 2007:

Max- only because Gainey got him the pick. If not Gainey no Max. Also Max was drafted as more of a playmaker and was looking like a bust playing on the 3rd line. Only when he went back to the AHL and played with Boucher and DD did he explode in scoring. So is it on TT or the development and the GM?

McD - Wasn't looking to good until he was traded for Gomez and went to NYR. So again why credit TT when he was clearly developed by the Rangers, so couldn't we just say it was all the Rangers AHL staff that did the heavy lifting?

PK - Raw player his D was very questionable. Then he goes to Boucher and Martin and he improves his games leaps and bounds. He plays for MT and wins a Norris. So again why should I credit TT at all for this pick he didn't hit his stride until he was developed at the AHL and NHL level.

So it cuts both ways. If the development is ruining the picks and lack of picks is an issue well then 07 is not really impressive because if not for habs development and Gainey then TT would have nothing.

 

[montreal]

To me the development excuse is a cop out, its passing the buck. And you are right we don't know everything so we judge on what we know which is the picks that TT took and the ones he missed nearly directly after his and we can see he took the wrong player. Thats what bothers me, not how he does in relation to other scouts, or Slys job but the fact that we can look back and call tons of players he chose wrongly on. If he is the best or one of the best he should be getting the RIGHT players.

Like I mentioned, Sly doesn't have a winning team but look at the numbers guys like Hudon/Ghetto/Beau/Scherback/Carr/ and to a lesser extent Mac have put up under him. All respectable AHL careers. So those players aren't langishing in the AHL they just aren't good enough to take the next step. And if we put it on Sly or lack of picks then how is it fair to give TT credit for his picks?

Lets look at his great 2007:

Max- only because Gainey got him the pick. If not Gainey no Max. Also Max was drafted as more of a playmaker and was looking like a bust playing on the 3rd line. Only when he went back to the AHL and played with Boucher and DD did he explode in scoring. So is it on TT or the development and the GM?

McD - Wasn't looking to good until he was traded for Gomez and went to NYR. So again why credit TT when he was clearly developed by the Rangers, so couldn't we just say it was all the Rangers AHL staff that did the heavy lifting?

PK - Raw player his D was very questionable. Then he goes to Boucher and Martin and he improves his games leaps and bounds. He plays for MT and wins a Norris. So again why should I credit TT at all for this pick he didn't hit his stride until he was developed at the AHL and NHL level.

So it cuts both ways. If the development is ruining the picks and lack of picks is an issue well then 07 is not really impressive because if not for habs development and Gainey then TT would have nothing.

It's completely insane to me that someone that follows hockey could believe that development is a cop out. It's hard to even know how to respond to that as it's like someone saying the earth is flat to me. To each their own I guess. As for Timmins getting the right players, he does, just sounds like you have standards that don't match up with the stats on success rate of prospects outside the top 10/20.

Hudon has been really good in the AHL, the rest not so much, especially McCarron who started out great in his first month but ever since never put up good numbers. Since the first month of his pro career, McCarron has had, 37 pts in 69 games while playing on the top lines and PP/PK. That's not terrible but not impressive either. He had 20 pts in his first 21 games. Scherbak when you look at how he's been handled in the AHL to date, has done a pretty good job, not as good as Hudon's 57 pts in his rookie year but 55 pts in 96 games to date as a 19/21 year old. Beaulieu was up and down in the AHL and in no way would I ever give Lefebvre credit when the kid has struggled so much but as soon as he plays with Gonchar to starts to figure it out. Speaks very poorly on Lefebvre imo. Ghetto was good in the AHL and Carr in his first 2 seasons in the AHL put up a ppg of .6 which is good for an ave of 46 pts. Not bad at all but a bit below Hudon. Of course he was 23/24 during those years so that helps some.

Pacioretty was a All Star in the USHL, he was on the top line in the NCAA as a Freshman, so he was a good pick from day one. Just revisionist history there.

McDonagh was a standout in the USHS, and was looking good in the NCAA just that fans were pissed cause he opted to return to the NCAA vs turning pro.

Subban was said to have questionable D but he made big strides cause when I saw him in the OHL after being drafted I didn't see the issues people were saying. I got a ton of heat because I started rating him over McDonagh while he was still in juniors and people kept saying to me how can he be better if he was picked later. Clearly Timmins saw something in Subban that others missed. That's one hell of a pick and a career maker.

 

[Chili]

What teams have drafted and developed better than Montreal?

Washington, Chicago, Anaheim, Tampa Bay I would think for sure?

Based on results, imo, + Columbus, Detroit, LA, Minnesota, Nashville, Islanders, Ottawa, Pittsburgh, St Louis...

 

[jfm133]

Not sure who said that the guy needs to be 1.000. I mean, the 2007 draft that ALL OF US keep raving about still shows that he didn't hit every single pick he made, so moot point. Not sure when we disregard what he has done before 2007. Not sure why when people bring what he has done after, we are told what he has done before. That would be like saying that Scott Gomez is a great NHL'er right now 'cause he had numerous 60 point and more seasons in the past. People aren't saying that HIS ENTIRE CAREER IS FAIL. People might just be evaluating that recently, he has struggled. I have no idea why we can't do that. That's like the whiners with their "where are the haters" now stupid posts whenever a guy who DOES struggle finally scores a goal. It's not because he scored that he did not struggle before. Well for Timmins, it's not because he had a great 2007 draft that he STILL has great drafts.

In 10 years the 2012-2016 period will be seen as a good one for the Habs. So what are you talking about? Again you complain about the 2008-2011 period were half of his top-60 picks were taken away from him. Same old story.

Galchenyuk
Hudon
McCarron
DeLaRose
Lekhonen
Andrighetto
Scherbak
Juulsen
Sergachev
Mete

They will all become NHLers. And if one or two in the list fail, those that still have a chance.

Fucale
Lernout
Bourque
Bitten


It will be around 10 players in 5 years. You can also add Petry and Shaw that were obtained using draft choices from this period.

You can also add Condon, Lindgren and Carr hired as amateur UFA.

 

[Habs]

Based on results, imo, + Columbus, Detroit, LA, Minnesota, Nashville, Islanders, Ottawa, Pittsburgh, St Louis...

Based on last year's world juniors, almost everyone... throw in Philly and Tampa as well.

 

[Whitesnake]

It's completely insane to me that someone that follows hockey could believe that development is a cop out.

Development is immensely important. And I want Lefebvre out. But the cop out comes from when the pick is great, it' sTimmins. When it's not, it's development. That's when the cop out comes in. Not as far as how development is important or not. But yes, there is some ways to know if development played a role or not. I mean people who came in to say how Lefebvre played a role in Gallagher was laughable for me. The guy is able to change somebody in 33 games but not in 3 years. Just like Patch. I do agree with you. See no relevant to Lefebvre there. But Hudon.....I mean I didn't like him in Juniors. Never thought he'd be the player he is right now. So.....if he makes....is that a good pick? Or a good development case?

I mean aside from the obvious, I think that this is where people go back to Timmins.

In 10 years the 2012-2016 period will be seen as a good one for the Habs. So what are you talking about? Again you complain about the 2008-2011 period were half of his top-60 picks were taken away from him. Same old story.

Galchenyuk
Hudon
McCarron
DeLaRose
Lekhonen
Andrighetto
Scherbak
Juulsen
Sergachev
Mete

They will all become NHLers. And if one or two in the list fail, those that still have a chance.

Fucale
Lernout
Bourque
Bitten


It will be around 10 players in 5 years. You can also add Petry and Shaw that were obtained using draft choices from this period.

You can also add Condon, Lindgren and Carr hired as amateur UFA.

What's left to say after this post. I'Ll give you that. There is actually nothing to say after you post. Kudos. I mean, all this futuristic vision you have....what can I say? It's awesome how you could turn ACTUAL results into FUTURISTIC ONES. Are they all going to play key roles too? The great part about your type of "evaluation" is that I can say that for EVERY single team......and you can't say that I'M wrong about it. So out of that list, aside from Galchenyuk and Lehkonen, nobody is a regular in the NHL'er. And only Galchenyuk plays a key role. THAT is what we're seeing. And THAT is the evaluation we're making RIGHT NOW. That is subject to change ONCE your futuristic evaluation becomes reality. Thing is, there's the quantity part and the quality one.

By the way, I think you missed a few names.....how come your vision doesn't see Bradley and Addison? Where's Audette? And where is the hidden gem in Vejdemo? Geez, have you given up on those already? How could you?

The idea of a draft is to get players you can't any other way. The players to "tough" to get. So we'll see out of that list who fits that profile. So I,m keeping your post. And we'll see in the future. You might very well be right. And I,ll GLADLY talk about it if you are.

Timmins didn't have a lot of picks to work with. He doesn't screw up his 1st rounders during that time and we're probably not talking about him at all. Leblanc, Tinordi, Beaulieu.....that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the number of picks he had. Hopefully Beaulieu one day picks it up and REALLY play like the top 4 he is suppose to be. Still waiting for that offensive touch though.

 

[scrubadam]

In 10 years the 2012-2016 period will be seen as a good one for the Habs. So what are you talking about? Again you complain about the 2008-2011 period were half of his top-60 picks were taken away from him. Same old story.

Galchenyuk -3OVA
Hudon - nope
McCarron - 4th liner right now
DeLaRose - nope
Lekhonen - good
Andrighetto - nope
Scherbak - jury is out
Juulsen - jury is out
Sergachev - 4 C's taken within 6 picks, 3 direcetly after him. Yet habs are always looking for a 1C
Mete - probably 4 years from making it

They will all become NHLers. And if one or two in the list fail, those that still have a chance.

Fucale
Lernout
Bourque
Bitten


It will be around 10 players in 5 years. You can also add Petry and Shaw that were obtained using draft choices from this period.

You can also add Condon, Lindgren and Carr hired as amateur UFA.

Whats funny is you could make the list from 08-11 and say all the players habs drafted will make it and here we are where they almost all busted. I remember when Tinordi was Chara lite, Beau Markov lite, Leblanc a premier 2 way C, Turnev and Avitsen Russian superstars etc...

Carr is done in Montreal nothing more than a 4th liner at best. Future Chris Terry. And you talk about Shaw. Well we drafted Dietz instead of Shaw. could have saved 2 2nds instead of having to trade for him.

It's completely insane to me that someone that follows hockey could believe that development is a cop out. It's hard to even know how to respond to that as it's like someone saying the earth is flat to me. To each their own I guess. As for Timmins getting the right players, he does, just sounds like you have standards that don't match up with the stats on success rate of prospects outside the top 10/20.

Hudon has been really good in the AHL, the rest not so much, especially McCarron who started out great in his first month but ever since never put up good numbers. Since the first month of his pro career, McCarron has had, 37 pts in 69 games while playing on the top lines and PP/PK. That's not terrible but not impressive either. He had 20 pts in his first 21 games. Scherbak when you look at how he's been handled in the AHL to date, has done a pretty good job, not as good as Hudon's 57 pts in his rookie year but 55 pts in 96 games to date as a 19/21 year old. Beaulieu was up and down in the AHL and in no way would I ever give Lefebvre credit when the kid has struggled so much but as soon as he plays with Gonchar to starts to figure it out. Speaks very poorly on Lefebvre imo. Ghetto was good in the AHL and Carr in his first 2 seasons in the AHL put up a ppg of .6 which is good for an ave of 46 pts. Not bad at all but a bit below Hudon. Of course he was 23/24 during those years so that helps some.

Pacioretty was a All Star in the USHL, he was on the top line in the NCAA as a Freshman, so he was a good pick from day one. Just revisionist history there.

McDonagh was a standout in the USHS, and was looking good in the NCAA just that fans were pissed cause he opted to return to the NCAA vs turning pro.

Subban was said to have questionable D but he made big strides cause when I saw him in the OHL after being drafted I didn't see the issues people were saying. I got a ton of heat because I started rating him over McDonagh while he was still in juniors and people kept saying to me how can he be better if he was picked later. Clearly Timmins saw something in Subban that others missed. That's one hell of a pick and a career maker.

Whitesnake said it perfectly below but I will repeat its a cop out because its an easy way to hand wave TT's failed picks. Its not his fault its "development". So then like I said every player who does well why is it because of TT? Why should TT be lauded and called the best because of 05 and 07 isn't that on the development?

And every player drafted is the cream of their crop and can dominate the lower leagues why else are they drafted and drafted high? Barely any scout is going to select with a 1st or 2nd or 3rd round pick a player who is bottom in scoring in a league (while maybe TT will with his Crisp pick).

But Max struggled when he game to MTL and was looking like a 3rd liner. He goes to the AHL with DD and Boucher and explodes so can't I say its all on development.

Same with McD. He was struggling when he was traded to the NYR. He goes to the Rangers and turns out to be a good D so why is that on TT shouldn't that be on NYR development staff?

Its a cop out simply because when a pick doesn't work like Tinordi or Leblanc then its because of Sly. But when a pick works well its because TT had amazing foresight to chose that player.

Wether TT is great or not shouldn't be the discussion. The focus should be on the job he is doing and if you look at 08 draft till today is he really finding the habs the best talent? If you think so then we will just agree to disagree. To me its pretty easy look at the players he drafted and those within a few picks and then come back and say he took the right player. Every scout can make mistakes but how many mistakes do you tolerate?

And I mentioned a few posts above but for a team that has been looking for a 1C TT in 14 years has done a great job of missing out on drafting C's for this team. I like the Serge pick but 4 centers were chose after him, 3 directly. I have a feeling in 3 years we will be talking about a 60+ point C the habs missed out on once again.

 

[yianik]

Excluding fringe NHL players, my eyeball analysis is that even good bottom players have an NHL career that lasts about as long as good players, so 10-12 years plus. '

Common sense tells you that a team needs to draft an average of 2 roster players , including a top 6F/4D every year. Some fill in by undrafted guys signed as FA, think I read about 5%.

Between 2008-11 we have Beaulieu and Gallagher, that is it. Gallagher is top 6, except for this year and Beaulieu is at least a roster guy, maybe top 4. Nygren is a possible big loss here. We ought to have had 8 roster guys and 4 top players in that span.

Absolutely TT was handcuffed in that time period. Four drafts so 4 picks at each round. BG gave him 3 1sts, 1 2nd and 3 3rds. So of our 12 top 3 round picks TT had 7. Out of those 5 missing picks I could see it having cost us a couple of roster players including a top 6F/4D. But we are still short.

So the missing picks cost us for sure, but bad picks cost us the rest. TT just did not do well in this time frame.

I know the stats show TT is one of the best, especially given where we pick and total points produced. Let's face it though, those numbers are what they are due to the lights out picks TT had pre 2007.

What does this mean ? Probably what is common sense, when TT was lights out there was some lady luck around and between 2008-11 TT reverted to the mean.

TT is neither horrible or a genius. If he is average that is not a bad thing, if he is a above average that is great. The drafts from 2012 on I guess will tip the scales.

 

[montreal]

Whitesnake said it perfectly below but I will repeat its a cop out because its an easy way to hand wave TT's failed picks. Its not his fault its "development". So then like I said every player who does well why is it because of TT? Why should TT be lauded and called the best because of 05 and 07 isn't that on the development?

And every player drafted is the cream of their crop and can dominate the lower leagues why else are they drafted and drafted high? Barely any scout is going to select with a 1st or 2nd or 3rd round pick a player who is bottom in scoring in a league (while maybe TT will with his Crisp pick).

But Max struggled when he game to MTL and was looking like a 3rd liner. He goes to the AHL with DD and Boucher and explodes so can't I say its all on development.

Same with McD. He was struggling when he was traded to the NYR. He goes to the Rangers and turns out to be a good D so why is that on TT shouldn't that be on NYR development staff?

Its a cop out simply because when a pick doesn't work like Tinordi or Leblanc then its because of Sly. But when a pick works well its because TT had amazing foresight to chose that player.

Wether TT is great or not shouldn't be the discussion. The focus should be on the job he is doing and if you look at 08 draft till today is he really finding the habs the best talent? If you think so then we will just agree to disagree. To me its pretty easy look at the players he drafted and those within a few picks and then come back and say he took the right player. Every scout can make mistakes but how many mistakes do you tolerate?

And I mentioned a few posts above but for a team that has been looking for a 1C TT in 14 years has done a great job of missing out on drafting C's for this team. I like the Serge pick but 4 centers were chose after him, 3 directly. I have a feeling in 3 years we will be talking about a 60+ point C the habs missed out on once again.

It's hard to take someone serious that thinks development is a cop out. You blame Timmins but then turnaround and say you don't watch the AHL so you don't even know what Lefebvre is doing. Don't you think that limits your opinion right off the bat?

Timmins failed picks are more to do with being realistic then development. Every scout is going to have a long list of misses, there's a reason why so many prospects don't make it outside top 10/20 picks. But if you watched the job that Lefebvre, you might look at the situation differently. How he's handled Scherbak, Leblanc and others, just seems like a very poor way to handle your top prospects. I've said over and over and over and over that the blame for Leblanc, Tinordi, Beaulieu fall on many not just Timmins, not just Lefebvre, but MANY. That said the moves Lefebvre makes imo doesn't help matters and he very much shares the blame for some of these guys not panning out. Others are going to peak at 18/19/20. Anyone that follows the draft knows this just as they know most picks won't pan out. That's why the job Timmins has done is impressive, he's been one of the top scouts because he can find talent. Yes he's made mistakes, he's had some bad picks but that should be expected.

As for Pac, Guy Boucher imo is the best coach we have had in the AHL. But my point was that Pac was getting it done in the NCAA but turned pro early after just 1 season so perhaps he wasn't ready to turn pro and should have stayed for 1 more year under one of the best coaches in the NCAA (and a former Hab)

McDonagh wasn't struggling at Wisconsin, he was a true Freshman and was a top 3 D at Wisconsin. I know they wanted more out of him but while he wasn't racking up the points he played a good physical and defensive game on a stacked blueline.

But it's not a cop not, it's crazy to me that you can look back and say Timmins did a great job up to '07 and then when all the 1st round picks after that play for the same coach in the AHL and all struggle, it doesn't occur to you that the problem is more the coach then the guy that was doing a great job but all the sudden forgot how. It's like you won't listen to reason and just want say it's Timmins fault period even though he did great, one day he stopped doing great for whatever reason.