Trevor Timmins Part II

[montreal]

Also, we would benefit from a Boucher type of AHL coach (many players that made the NHL credited him to some extent) instead of a Lefebvre type (I have yet to hear a player saying he helped him).

agreed 100%. The funny part is at least from what I had heard, it was Timmins that talked Boucher into leaving the Q for the AHL. Granted that was under a different management team so who knows how much pull/say he has with the current group.

 

[Whitesnake]

not overboard at all. Fans are crapping all over Timmins for '08 to present, where's the context? The mere fact that no Hab scout has ever had less then 6 picks, and now all the sudden since '08 it's happened 3 times but that's not supposed to be an impact. And if you read the previous Timmins threads, I pointed out how we are picking less and how few top 50 picks he's had. You can't hold him to the same standards if he's picking less and lower. It's crap to suggest otherwise.

The context is that nobody is comparing eras. You would be totally right if we would be comparing Timmins to André Boudrias in the Savard era....but nobody does that. We are just looking at him, and just wished he'd do a better job. That's all. And we base our opinion on what he was able to do before 2007....with picks in the 3rd, 5th, 7th or 9th round. With the audacity and wisdom he had when he picked Price. With the clairvoyance he had with his McDo/Patch/Subban pick. There is always context. And sometimes it will favor him. 'Cause even the ones who say that he diddn't have a lot of picks to work with, I said also that we will continue evaluating him especially based on 2012 and 2013 where he had more picks. Mind you....I also know that not all drafts are equal and that it's possible, unfortunately, that 2013 was probably one of the worst year to have a lot of picks. 2nd round look bad right now for everybody. Strangely enough, 3rd round look slighly better. Yet, we didn't do good in that round either. And again, while we know nothing and are just armchair chair GM's, lately, I know that the out of left field picks made by him and his crew NEVER worked out.

The WTF picks then, are still WTF pick now....like Crisp. So being one of the best in his field, you would totally expect that he'd do better than stupid idiots like us who know nothing. And my point is solely to mention that he is struggling. Especially compared to his first part of mandate. That's all. Yet, again, evaluation is still ongoing.....2012 as a whole look way worst than it looked when it happened. 2013, look fine with Mac and Lehkonen. Which is about what I think will happen. 2014 is a big freakin question mark though Scherbak is still a potential top 6.....others are big question marks with one WTF pick in Koberstein. And the rest is way too early to make any kind of comments though....there are some WTF picks in there that I can't wait to see their progression in Vejdemo and Staum and Pezzetta and Henrikson. As far as I'm concerned, WTF picks are 2 things. A pick that we obviously didn't know 'cause we are just fans, we don't have the machine that they do, it's not our job so we can't go to every game of hockey that exist....so that those guys are pros, and they discovered a gem that not a lot of peole were able to find so that this WTF pick will become a great pick. See what Detroit did with Datsyuk and a few others, etc. But there are the WTF picks that even the scouting community say WTF so imagine the fans....and that started as one and finish as one and eventually become a "mistake". I understand that at one point, context suggest that starting at round 3, you could take chances and so on but based on what you said, if most if not ALL of the WTF picks end up busting...maybe it's time to change strategy? Yet, Timmins had his few WTF moments prior to 2007 and...succeed in some of them. Streit, Halak, Emelin.

Like I said before context is perfectly fine. Thing is...when people use it and say that we should start comparing to others to see how great he is.....they suddenly forget context. They won't mention that Rangers didn't have a 1st pick since 2013. That they also only had 9 picks in 2012 and 2013 combined. And that A LOT of teams had to work with reduced number of draft picks, or lack of high picks during the same time. Reason why when you try to put the context in all of this, you need to do it in its entirety.....or just compare Timmins work himself and see that from 08 to 12, only 3 players play on our team. And one of them is a 3rd overall, the type of pick we NEVER credit other teams for having. Never heard people in here crediting Chicago for picking Toews. And so on. We say that OF COURSE they are a top team, they benefitiated from high picks.

What I would like from Timmins soon is to find our own Pastrnak, Kuznetsov, Perry, Cory Schneider, Giroux, John Carlson and so on. No hidden gems....but great players that were seen as great and still were able to be drafted by a team low 1st round. Or other picks high 2nd round that means that were also available low first round. As of now, since Pacioretty we haven't been able to. The ones in list to do so for us and that remains to be seen are Mac, Scherbak and Juulsen. We'll see how that goes. I have high hopes for Juulsen though.

 

[Habs Icing]

Bergevin has certainly been better then Gainey in terms of asset management, but I'd argue it's easier when you already have a good team as you are mostly just maintaining rather then building.

Patches Chucky Radulov
Lekhonen Pleks Gally
Byron Danault Shaw
Flynn Mitchell Carr
Andreghetto

Emelin Weber
Markov Petry
Beaulieu Redmond
Barberio Pateryn

Price Montoya

In case you're wondering what the names in red mean, they're players acquired by MB. Does that look like a roster that is being maintained and not built?

Everyone is entitled to their opinions but they shouldn't pretend to back up those opinions with made up factoids.

 

[Aceekay]

Patches Chucky Radulov
Lekhonen Pleks Gally
Byron Danault Shaw
Flynn Mitchell Carr
Andreghetto

Emelin Weber
Markov Petry
Beaulieu Redmond
Barberio Pateryn

Price Montoya

In case you're wondering what the names in red mean, they're players acquired by MB. Does that look like a roster that is being maintained and not built?

Everyone is entitled to their opinions but they shouldn't pretend to back up those opinions with made up factoids.

Bergevin didn't acquire Gallagher. Galchenyuk and Lehkonen are debatable considering it was Timmins who got us these players.

 

[Habs Icing]

Bergevin didn't acquire Gallagher. Galchenyuk and Lehkonen are debatable considering it was Timmins who got us these players.

I got carried away with my red marker. You're right about Gally.

Chucky & Lekhonen came in under his regime, part of his team building.

 

[SOLR]

not overboard at all. Fans are crapping all over Timmins for '08 to present, where's the context? The mere fact that no Hab scout has ever had less then 6 picks, and now all the sudden since '08 it's happened 3 times but that's not supposed to be an impact. And if you read the previous Timmins threads, I pointed out how we are picking less and how few top 50 picks he's had. You can't hold him to the same standards if he's picking less and lower. It's crap to suggest otherwise.

edit- found it, post 877

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=2008333&page=36

It's completely overboard because when you say "fans" lacking context, you are certainly not talking about the long stream of factual posts I (and many others) have done on the matter (go search them, for your context). It's just your way of dismissing these arguments by making us appear like irrational fans. I just don't think Timmins should be excused by default for poor performance. Besides, you should know better than invent a fictitious label you can insult people with. Not all "fans" are alike. Trump is no longer campaigning and using "Crooked Hillary", or as you say it "No-Context fans!" Aren't personal insults against HFboards rule book or it's too clever for others moderators to see it?

It's completely overboard because it was an emotional response to being called on your ********. Quit it with the false equivalency of comparing eras or calling anyone else's opinion ********. If there are factual arguments that Timmins performance has not been bad since 08 is relies on
1) the choice of Chucky over the others options present that year
2) the future performance of Sergachev
3) The continuous lack of 2nd rounders (or top 50 picks)
4) The development of Sherbak, McCarron, Juulsen and to a lesser degree, DLR, Fucale, Lekhonen etc.

Even most TV networks recognised this false equivalency when comparing Jagr careers with Messier's. They all used an era-adjusted point total to show how Jagr was offensively superior to Messier.

In others words, the jury is still out with Timmins recently(and it's more than time we take off the rose glasses). If Sergachev bombs, and Sherbak, McCarron, Juulsen, don't exactly pan out, the lack of 2nd rounders should certainly not protect Timmins.

 

[montreal]

It's completely overboard because when you say "fans" lacking context, you are certainly not talking about the long stream of factual posts I (and many others) have done on the matter (go search them, for your context). It's just your way of dismissing these arguments by making us appear like irrational fans. I just don't think Timmins should be excused by default for poor performance. Besides, you should know better than invent a fictitious label you can insult people with. Not all "fans" are alike. Trump is no longer campaigning and using "Crooked Hillary", or as you say it "No-Context fans!" Aren't personal insults against HFboards rule book or it's too clever for others moderators to see it?

It's completely overboard because it was an emotional response to being called on your ********. Quit it with the false equivalency of comparing eras or calling anyone else's opinion ********. If there are factual arguments that Timmins performance has not been bad since 08 is relies on
1) the choice of Chucky over the others options present that year
2) the future performance of Sergachev
3) The continuous lack of 2nd rounders (or top 50 picks)
4) The development of Sherbak, McCarron, Juulsen and to a lesser degree, DLR, Fucale, Lekhonen etc.

Even most TV networks recognised this false equivalency when comparing Jagr careers with Messier's. They all used an era-adjusted point total to show how Jagr was offensively superior to Messier.

In others words, the jury is still out with Timmins recently(and it's more than time we take off the rose glasses). If Sergachev bombs, and Sherbak, McCarron, Juulsen, don't exactly pan out, the lack of 2nd rounders should certainly not protect Timmins.

it's not overboard at all, it's pointing out what others seem to be missing. It's insane to think that picking less often and fewer top 50 picks won't impact you. And since when is HF, the Habs board and this subject not been full of irrational fans? And how is calling your post total BS a personal insult since you said Timmins had bad scouting performance which is total BS since his track record proves otherwise.

 

[bsl]

You exclude or include periods based on legitimate variables.

For example, you can start with 2003, because that's when Timmins was hired. That makes sense. Starting with 2008 is a logical fallacy however.

Correct. And as usual I read the post first and guess it is your post. Your Hal tone is consistent.

 

[Whitesnake]

it's not overboard at all, it's pointing out what others seem to be missing. It's insane to think that picking less often and fewer top 50 picks won't impact you. And since when is HF, the Habs board and this subject not been full of irrational fans? And how is calling your post total BS a personal insult since you said Timmins had bad scouting performance which is total BS since his track record proves otherwise.

Timmins was able to find Gallagher despite the lower number of picks. Timmins was clairvoyant enough to pick Price when nobody saw that coming. Timmins chose Subban who was seen at the time has having serious defensive issues. He picked Pacioretty 22nd when people were incredibly questioning his offensive attributes. Timmins was once able to do a lot with not so much. Timmins was and maybe, needs to be determined, to find players outside of round 1st. And almost on every single round. From the period we talked about, he didn't do it enough and certainly not as frequently. Remains to be seen what he will be about from 2012.

I think that the excuse of "so little picks" works if the only argument was...."He can't give us 5 NHL'ers per year" Exagerrating....but you see my point. Thing is, you could have 5 picks a year, and still choose Braden Holtby instead of Steve Quailer. NOt having a lot of picks refrain yourself from taking TONS of chances....and hitting a homerun here and there...true. Yet, again, getting TONS of picks but having them in an awful draft year...might not be better after all. But at one point, I think that he shouldn't be absolve from criticisms.

 

[montreal]

The context is that nobody is comparing eras. You would be totally right if we would be comparing Timmins to André Boudrias in the Savard era....but nobody does that. We are just looking at him, and just wished he'd do a better job. That's all. And we base our opinion on what he was able to do before 2007....with picks in the 3rd, 5th, 7th or 9th round. With the audacity and wisdom he had when he picked Price. With the clairvoyance he had with his McDo/Patch/Subban pick. There is always context. And sometimes it will favor him. 'Cause even the ones who say that he diddn't have a lot of picks to work with, I said also that we will continue evaluating him especially based on 2012 and 2013 where he had more picks. Mind you....I also know that not all drafts are equal and that it's possible, unfortunately, that 2013 was probably one of the worst year to have a lot of picks. 2nd round look bad right now for everybody. Strangely enough, 3rd round look slighly better. Yet, we didn't do good in that round either. And again, while we know nothing and are just armchair chair GM's, lately, I know that the out of left field picks made by him and his crew NEVER worked out.

The WTF picks then, are still WTF pick now....like Crisp. So being one of the best in his field, you would totally expect that he'd do better than stupid idiots like us who know nothing. And my point is solely to mention that he is struggling. Especially compared to his first part of mandate. That's all. Yet, again, evaluation is still ongoing.....2012 as a whole look way worst than it looked when it happened. 2013, look fine with Mac and Lehkonen. Which is about what I think will happen. 2014 is a big freakin question mark though Scherbak is still a potential top 6.....others are big question marks with one WTF pick in Koberstein. And the rest is way too early to make any kind of comments though....there are some WTF picks in there that I can't wait to see their progression in Vejdemo and Staum and Pezzetta and Henrikson. As far as I'm concerned, WTF picks are 2 things. A pick that we obviously didn't know 'cause we are just fans, we don't have the machine that they do, it's not our job so we can't go to every game of hockey that exist....so that those guys are pros, and they discovered a gem that not a lot of peole were able to find so that this WTF pick will become a great pick. See what Detroit did with Datsyuk and a few others, etc. But there are the WTF picks that even the scouting community say WTF so imagine the fans....and that started as one and finish as one and eventually become a "mistake". I understand that at one point, context suggest that starting at round 3, you could take chances and so on but based on what you said, if most if not ALL of the WTF picks end up busting...maybe it's time to change strategy? Yet, Timmins had his few WTF moments prior to 2007 and...succeed in some of them. Streit, Halak, Emelin.

Like I said before context is perfectly fine. Thing is...when people use it and say that we should start comparing to others to see how great he is.....they suddenly forget context. They won't mention that Rangers didn't have a 1st pick since 2013. That they also only had 9 picks in 2012 and 2013 combined. And that A LOT of teams had to work with reduced number of draft picks, or lack of high picks during the same time. Reason why when you try to put the context in all of this, you need to do it in its entirety.....or just compare Timmins work himself and see that from 08 to 12, only 3 players play on our team. And one of them is a 3rd overall, the type of pick we NEVER credit other teams for having. Never heard people in here crediting Chicago for picking Toews. And so on. We say that OF COURSE they are a top team, they benefitiated from high picks.

What I would like from Timmins soon is to find our own Pastrnak, Kuznetsov, Perry, Cory Schneider, Giroux, John Carlson and so on. No hidden gems....but great players that were seen as great and still were able to be drafted by a team low 1st round. Or other picks high 2nd round that means that were also available low first round. As of now, since Pacioretty we haven't been able to. The ones in list to do so for us and that remains to be seen are Mac, Scherbak and Juulsen. We'll see how that goes. I have high hopes for Juulsen though.

what people are doing is throwing out everything he did prior to '07. How many times in these Timmins threads have we heard something along the lines of well if you look at the '08 draft to now, etc....

I've repeatedly said how silly it is to look at a few years and not the whole picture (since we can't really count the last few drafts yet since it's just too early). But if you are going to look at a few years and discount the previous ones, why not have some context? The mere fact that the Habs never had less then 6 picks and only 1 time before Timmins did they ever have less then 7 picks and that's not supposed to be an impact on the job he's done when posters compare it to the job he's done from '03 to '07. That's why I think context is needed here.

As for the Crisp pick and ones like that, we don't know all the details about who is pushing for us to pick what player. I keep bringing it up but we created a position that didn't exist for Shane Churla and yet we don't know how much pull/say he has. Is he behind some of these stranger picks for size/strength/toughness. Or did Timmins just make some off the board picks? I'm not saying he won't make mistakes cause he will just as everyone else will.

He's found plenty of good players in the past and while some posters don't like the excuse of development, imo it's a major factor for some of the picks not looking better. That's not to say he didn't make a mistake on Leblanc, and the Tinordi pick is hard to fault him for the league changing so quickly as who would have thought that 6'6 hulking blueliners wouldn't be highly sought after unless they can really move the puck and have high speed/mobility/skating.

 

[Sorinth]

Patches Chucky Radulov
Lekhonen Pleks Gally
Byron Danault Shaw
Flynn Mitchell Carr
Andreghetto

Emelin Weber
Markov Petry
Beaulieu Redmond
Barberio Pateryn

Price Montoya

In case you're wondering what the names in red mean, they're players acquired by MB. Does that look like a roster that is being maintained and not built?

Everyone is entitled to their opinions but they shouldn't pretend to back up those opinions with made up factoids.

This will be my last post about this in this thread since it's getting pretty off topic. It's fine to say he added Weber, but he only did so because he already had a Norris level defenceman. Same goes for Galchenyuk, he came in and had a 3rd overall pick, it's not like he had to work for it, all he had to do was get out of Timmins way. He's basically added Petry, Radulov and depth players. If Radulov leaves as a FA, then his record is very thin for 5 years of work.

 

[Whitesnake]

what people are doing is throwing out everything he did prior to '07. How many times in these Timmins threads have we heard something along the lines of well if you look at the '08 draft to now, etc....

I've repeatedly said how silly it is to look at a few years and not the whole picture (since we can't really count the last few drafts yet since it's just too early). But if you are going to look at a few years and discount the previous ones, why not have some context? The mere fact that the Habs never had less then 6 picks and only 1 time before Timmins did they ever have less then 7 picks and that's not supposed to be an impact on the job he's done when posters compare it to the job he's done from '03 to '07. That's why I think context is needed here.

As for the Crisp pick and ones like that, we don't know all the details about who is pushing for us to pick what player. I keep bringing it up but we created a position that didn't exist for Shane Churla and yet we don't know how much pull/say he has. Is he behind some of these stranger picks for size/strength/toughness. Or did Timmins just make some off the board picks? I'm not saying he won't make mistakes cause he will just as everyone else will.

He's found plenty of good players in the past and while some posters don't like the excuse of development, imo it's a major factor for some of the picks not looking better. That's not to say he didn't make a mistake on Leblanc, and the Tinordi pick is hard to fault him for the league changing so quickly as who would have thought that 6'6 hulking blueliners wouldn't be highly sought after unless they can really move the puck and have high speed/mobility/skating.

I'm not throwing anything out. By separating both periods, I'm acknowledging his first part as being one of the best from any head scout. I'M praising him like there's no tomorrow. Despite the Kosty pick. Despite the Fischer pick.

And yes, you are right about Churla. Still, it's one thing or the other....if all the WTF picks never pan out...somebody will have to answer. The "crapshoot" excuse can't stick forever. You need results anyway. And as Mr. McCagg told us, draft is all Timmins. If Timmins won't like a player, I don't think he'll go for it. Maybe he'd hesitate between 2 guys and will fall for the guy who is being sold by Churla and others....but while I don't know this first hand and only go with what Mr. McCagg tells us, I fail to see Timmins going for a guy he doesn't like.

As far as development....don't worry. I do take that in consideration. I want Lefebvre out. For a long time now. Still.....how do you determine that?Did bringing DLR up in the NHL detrimental to his development? Frankly, I'm not a big believer of that. A player who has a good mental state will be able to move from this and get back in track.

What I'm a big believer in though is that for some people, their development will just STOP. And it's not the fault of ANYONE. You just reach your highest limit. I've seen plenty of junior superstars that were surely NHL'ers later and....they were not. Because they reached their limit at the Junior or AHL level. But then....how do you define that? Pretty tough. So who gets the blame? Goes to the head scout even though it might not be it.

Still....why should we judge head scouting and scouing in general differently? Is it really the GM fault if the players he acquired didn't perform? Do every coach deserved to be canned because his players don't perform? Do players deserve to be traded because their coach can't be used properly? Still....every position will be criticized even though it might not be their fault. I would guess that it's the same for scouting.

 

[montreal]

I'm not throwing anything out. By separating both periods, I'm acknowledging his first part as being one of the best from any head scout. I'M praising him like there's no tomorrow. Despite the Kosty pick. Despite the Fischer pick.

And yes, you are right about Churla. Still, it's one thing or the other....if all the WTF picks never pan out...somebody will have to answer. The "crapshoot" excuse can't stick forever. You need results anyway. And as Mr. McCagg told us, draft is all Timmins. If Timmins won't like a player, I don't think he'll go for it. Maybe he'd hesitate between 2 guys and will fall for the guy who is being sold by Churla and others....but while I don't know this first hand and only go with what Mr. McCagg tells us, I fail to see Timmins going for a guy he doesn't like.

As far as development....don't worry. I do take that in consideration. I want Lefebvre out. For a long time now. Still.....how do you determine that?Did bringing DLR up in the NHL detrimental to his development? Frankly, I'm not a big believer of that. A player who has a good mental state will be able to move from this and get back in track.

What I'm a big believer in though is that for some people, their development will just STOP. And it's not the fault of ANYONE. You just reach your highest limit. I've seen plenty of junior superstars that were surely NHL'ers later and....they were not. Because they reached their limit at the Junior or AHL level. But then....how do you define that? Pretty tough. So who gets the blame? Goes to the head scout even though it might not be it.

Still....why should we judge head scouting and scouing in general differently? Is it really the GM fault if the players he acquired didn't perform? Do every coach deserved to be canned because his players don't perform? Do players deserve to be traded because their coach can't be used properly? Still....every position will be criticized even though it might not be their fault. I would guess that it's the same for scouting.

So he was one of the best, then had a period where he struggle that just so happens to be the least amount of picks he's ever had with by far the least amount of top 50 picks from '08 to '11 (3) and then we need to see how the rest of it goes.

For me I look at the whole picture, since it's not like he just forgot how to find talent. Hence my concerns with development these past few years on top of lack of top 50 picks for several drafts.

As for bringing up a player too soon, I'm very much a believer in this. Hockey is really a simple game, so much of it is mental. Once you mess with a players confidence, you can really mess things up. Granted it could work the opposite for some players who thrive off negative results while others will struggle to cope as that's just human nature. That's why I was such a big fan of Guy Boucher as our AHL coach, hearing him speak about the psychology of a hockey player and the impact it has on them.

As for Churla and Timmins, I would think that management would know if someone isn't pulling their weight although when it comes to Lefebvre I can't answer why he still has a job other then they think he's getting the job done but if so then that means it's more on the scouting and we have seen some of them moved out/on.

 

[Sorinth]

Timmins was able to find Gallagher despite the lower number of picks. Timmins was clairvoyant enough to pick Price when nobody saw that coming. Timmins chose Subban who was seen at the time has having serious defensive issues. He picked Pacioretty 22nd when people were incredibly questioning his offensive attributes. Timmins was once able to do a lot with not so much. Timmins was and maybe, needs to be determined, to find players outside of round 1st. And almost on every single round. From the period we talked about, he didn't do it enough and certainly not as frequently. Remains to be seen what he will be about from 2012.

I think that the excuse of "so little picks" works if the only argument was...."He can't give us 5 NHL'ers per year" Exagerrating....but you see my point. Thing is, you could have 5 picks a year, and still choose Braden Holtby instead of Steve Quailer. NOt having a lot of picks refrain yourself from taking TONS of chances....and hitting a homerun here and there...true. Yet, again, getting TONS of picks but having them in an awful draft year...might not be better after all. But at one point, I think that he shouldn't be absolve from criticisms.

He isn't above criticism, but he should be judged relative to his peers not relative to his past. It's normal for some drafts to look great and others to suck. The odds of a pick making it are so low to begin with that it's mostly just random luck as to which years you'll get players.

As an example league wide the odds of getting 0 players that played 100 games with our 08 picks is 32%. So even if Timmins was 50% better then rest of the league it would still be a 50/50 coin flip to get a player that year.

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

Timmins 2006: David Fishcer, Ben Maxwell, Mathieu Carle, Ryan White, Pavel Valentenko, Cameron Cepek

Timmins 2008: Danny Kristo, Steve Quailer, Jason Missiaen, Maxim Trunev, Patrick Johnson.

So, in 2006 and 2008, he only drafted 1 NHL player total. Ryan White, a 4th liner/13th forward.

However, we all know what happened in 2007 when he got Subban, Pacioretty, McDonagh, Weber, etc.

I think the reason people are overly critical is due to their expectations. IDK why people in here want that outlier of a draft to be considered the rule, and not the exception. It's not just Timmins who isn't picking 3 superstars a draft anymore, it's every Head Scout in the league. Those claiming, "Timmins has the gift of foresight! Such clairvoyance!" do nothing but sadden themselves when Timmins can't live up to the standard from a decade ago.

He's made a few good picks in the 5th round, you're just setting yourself up for disappointment if you expect every pick in the 5th round to be good. Just like you can't hold him to a 2007 standard, that was simply one of the best drafts in any era, all-time.

 

[Whitesnake]

So he was one of the best, then had a period where he struggle that just so happens to be the least amount of picks he's ever had with by far the least amount of top 50 picks from '08 to '11 (3) and then we need to see how the rest of it goes.

For me I look at the whole picture, since it's not like he just forgot how to find talent. Hence my concerns with development these past few years on top of lack of top 50 picks for several drafts.

As for bringing up a player too soon, I'm very much a believer in this. Hockey is really a simple game, so much of it is mental. Once you mess with a players confidence, you can really mess things up. Granted it could work the opposite for some players who thrive off negative results while others will struggle to cope as that's just human nature. That's why I was such a big fan of Guy Boucher as our AHL coach, hearing him speak about the psychology of a hockey player and the impact it has on them.

As for Churla and Timmins, I would think that management would know if someone isn't pulling their weight although when it comes to Lefebvre I can't answer why he still has a job other then they think he's getting the job done but if so then that means it's more on the scouting and we have seen some of them moved out/on.

Yet again, I'm not dismissing that he had less picks to work with. But having less picks did not make him choose Leblanc, Tinordi and Beaulieu in the 1st round. And while he had more picks before, whilei he did struck out in a few late rounds, as everybody does, he also was able to find gems too. You'd just wish he'd still find them now with less picks. That's actually what I would count the best head scout in the business to do. The day we find him to be just good and not incredible, I guess expectations would be lower. I'M just not sure how a guy can be seen as the best, if he can share the same excuses as all the others do.

He isn't above criticism, but he should be judged relative to his peers not relative to his past. It's normal for some drafts to look great and others to suck. The odds of a pick making it are so low to begin with that it's mostly just random luck as to which years you'll get players.

As an example league wide the odds of getting 0 players that played 100 games with our 08 picks is 32%. So even if Timmins was 50% better then rest of the league it would still be a 50/50 coin flip to get a player that year.

Well again, if we could do that...but we also can't judge him to his peers? Why? Because we keep bringing the number of picks he's had. So even if a team would do better, it wouldn't count, as they probably had slightly more picks than we did. And since we all, me included, take the stats and do whatever we want with it, I was todl not that long ago that even if you take 2012 and 2013 and what you could have from those draft are 2 NHL'ers per draft....it's an AWESOME feature even if those guys don't play a key role in the team. So frankly, he's been categorized as great no matter what happens. 'Cause of his past, 'cause of his lack of picks, 'cause he's getting some NHL'ers even though he has A LOT of picks, 'cause the draft is a crapshoot etc. 'Cause if we'd really be interested in comparing him with his peers, we'd look at every team and see the chances that they made to their scouting group. 'Cause what we're doing right now is comparing him to OTHER TEAMS....but maybe some other teams sucked at scouting and since they changed their scouting group since 2009, 2010, 2011...they are much better.

I totally understand he's not the biggest of our problems. But it's a thread about him. I could talk about Desharnais but I don't think it's appropriate....And even if he's not the worst of our problems, I think we should try to be more efficient. Whether it's him, it's Churla, it's the overall scouting staff. Incredible that we haven't been able to find a great centerman before Galchy, which is a pivotal position, since Plekanec in 2001. And Galchy, well...they just were obligated to play him in that position....pretty sure they STILL are not at ease with that.

Timmins 2006: David Fishcer, Ben Maxwell, Mathieu Carle, Ryan White, Pavel Valentenko, Cameron Cepek

Timmins 2008: Danny Kristo, Steve Quailer, Jason Missiaen, Maxim Trunev, Patrick Johnson.

So, in 2006 and 2008, he only drafted 1 NHL player total. Ryan White, a 4th liner/13th forward.

However, we all know what happened in 2007 when he got Subban, Pacioretty, McDonagh, Weber, etc.

I think the reason people are overly critical is due to their expectations. IDK why people in here want that outlier of a draft to be considered the rule, and not the exception. It's not just Timmins who isn't picking 3 superstars a draft anymore, it's every Head Scout in the league. Those claiming, "Timmins has the gift of foresight! Such clairvoyance!" do nothing but sadden themselves when Timmins can't live up to the standard from a decade ago.

He's made a few good picks in the 5th round, you're just setting yourself up for disappointment if you expect every pick in the 5th round to be good. Just like you can't hold him to a 2007 standard, that was simply one of the best drafts in any era, all-time.

Nobody expect him to pick 3 superstars per draft. Nobody. Actually people who are more critic about him don't expect that at all. But I think people who are protecting him DO use this as a reminder as how great he is. 2007, for them, will always be there. That's why I ask the question not that long ago, that stayed unanswered, how many bad drafts do you need before you start questioning him and NOT mention 2007? 'Cause right now, I believe he could still have a bad 2012, and a bad 2013, and we will be told..."well look at the overall picture..he got us Subban, Patch, McDo...". But at one point, when is this going to stop? Boston fired Daniel Dubé, ex-player, who was a scout for them, and made them pick Patrice Bergeron. So I guess at one point, he couldn't keep reminding them how great he was with that selection and since it was more quiet after that...he got laid off.

So I don't think Timmins prowess should be forgotten. As I said before, I don't want him gone. I read quite a few posts about "it's time to move on" and find that pretty ludicrous. But....we will have to move on and see what he got for us lately. And again, analysis is still ongoing. Quite a few players in there that could be very helpful. We can't give up on any of those guys: Beaulieu, Hudon (even if they seemed to have been given up), MAC, DLR, Fucale (even if I'm not holding my breath, he,s still a goalie...a different breed...), and all the 2014 draftees and up.....So maybe he will redeem himself in a few years. No question. Just saying....it was more quiet lately. And he needs to pick it up. But he could, I think that Lehkonen was finally an awesome pick even if I had my doubts. I think Mac will be valuable. But it's pretty much what I'M expecting from 2013. From 2014, Scherbie, Lernout and maybe the hidden gem in Evans....We still have to add Audette who incredibly enough seems to be playing much better with better opposition. 2015 with Juulsen, and my insane love for Addison. 2016 with obviously Sergachev but also Mete and Bitten. There are stuff for Timmins to be adored once more.

 

[Boulette Canon]

Saw Juulsen play yesterday in Ottawa vs Czech Rep. What a great pick. Plays such a simple, accurate and smooth transition game and has a calming effect à la Weber on the ice. He also made the best hits of the night. This guy is going to be huge for us.

 

[Whitesnake]

Saw Juulsen play yesterday in Ottawa vs Czech Rep. What a great pick. Plays such a simple, accurate and smooth transition game and has a calming effect à la Weber on the ice. He also made the best hits of the night. This guy is going to be huge for us.

I believe so too. Chabot is obviously way more visible and might be more of a #1/#2 type of prospect...but Juulsen will be a #3/#4. And really valuable.

One thing I'm pissed about....play him on a PP! This guy has a rocket at the point. Why wouldn't they do that?

 

[Boulette Canon]

I believe so too. Chabot is obviously way more visible and might be more of a #1/#2 type of prospect...but Juulsen will be a #3/#4. And really valuable.

One thing I'm pissed about....play him on a PP! This guy has a rocket at the point. Why wouldn't they do that?

Chabot had a rough first period, then got settled in and had a great 3rd. Juulsen was just so consistent from start to finish.

Was also wondering why he wasn't on the PP. The first unit didn't generate a whole lot and the second one seems to revolve around Jost's one timer, which became very predictable after his PP goal.

 

[Sorinth]

Well again, if we could do that...but we also can't judge him to his peers? Why? Because we keep bringing the number of picks he's had. So even if a team would do better, it wouldn't count, as they probably had slightly more picks than we did. And since we all, me included, take the stats and do whatever we want with it, I was todl not that long ago that even if you take 2012 and 2013 and what you could have from those draft are 2 NHL'ers per draft....it's an AWESOME feature even if those guys don't play a key role in the team. So frankly, he's been categorized as great no matter what happens. 'Cause of his past, 'cause of his lack of picks, 'cause he's getting some NHL'ers even though he has A LOT of picks, 'cause the draft is a crapshoot etc. 'Cause if we'd really be interested in comparing him with his peers, we'd look at every team and see the chances that they made to their scouting group. 'Cause what we're doing right now is comparing him to OTHER TEAMS....but maybe some other teams sucked at scouting and since they changed their scouting group since 2009, 2010, 2011...they are much better.

Well here's a breakdown which gives the odds of getting an impact/NHL player for each pick.
http://www2.tsn.ca/fantasy_news/story/?id=455673

There are also plenty of ways to assign a value to a draft pick, and you can then compare what we got compared to the value of the picks.

No system of evaluation is perfect but can give an idea of how we are doing with the picks we have.

I totally understand he's not the biggest of our problems. But it's a thread about him. I could talk about Desharnais but I don't think it's appropriate....And even if he's not the worst of our problems, I think we should try to be more efficient. Whether it's him, it's Churla, it's the overall scouting staff. Incredible that we haven't been able to find a great centerman before Galchy, which is a pivotal position, since Plekanec in 2001. And Galchy, well...they just were obligated to play him in that position....pretty sure they STILL are not at ease with that.

Feel free to criticize him, but he's probably the least of our problems so it shouldn't surprise you that he'll be defended. Hell even Desharnais has his defenders. Posters sticking up for him doesn't mean he's perfect or above criticism, it's about putting that criticism in context.


Something that hasn't been talked about much is that in Timmins was in charge of both drafting and developing. When Bergevin took over he lost that developing mandate. Maybe the key to his early success was actually that he was really good at helping prospects develop.

 

[Habs Icing]

This will be my last post about this in this thread since it's getting pretty off topic. It's fine to say he added Weber, but he only did so because he already had a Norris level defenceman. Same goes for Galchenyuk, he came in and had a 3rd overall pick, it's not like he had to work for it, all he had to do was get out of Timmins way. He's basically added Petry, Radulov and depth players. If Radulov leaves as a FA, then his record is very thin for 5 years of work.

The point is not what did he use to get his players. You claimed he simply maintained and did not build. If that was true he would have stayed with PK. Making that trade shows he isn't interested in maintaining. He wants to build.

 

[DAChampion]

Timmins was able to find Gallagher despite the lower number of picks. Timmins was clairvoyant enough to pick Price when nobody saw that coming. Timmins chose Subban who was seen at the time has having serious defensive issues. He picked Pacioretty 22nd when people were incredibly questioning his offensive attributes. Timmins was once able to do a lot with not so much. Timmins was and maybe, needs to be determined, to find players outside of round 1st. And almost on every single round. From the period we talked about, he didn't do it enough and certainly not as frequently. Remains to be seen what he will be about from 2012.

I think that the excuse of "so little picks" works if the only argument was...."He can't give us 5 NHL'ers per year" Exagerrating....but you see my point. Thing is, you could have 5 picks a year, and still choose Braden Holtby instead of Steve Quailer. NOt having a lot of picks refrain yourself from taking TONS of chances....and hitting a homerun here and there...true. Yet, again, getting TONS of picks but having them in an awful draft year...might not be better after all. But at one point, I think that he shouldn't be absolve from criticisms.

The so little picks argument fails for two reasons:

1) The lack of 9th round draft choices is irrelevant.
2) The Habs do lose 2nd rounders some years, but they gain them in other years. This has the affect of shifting the expectations in time, but not adjusting them.

Timmins did get fewer 2nd rounders in the period 2008-2011 ... but he got them all back in 2012 and 2013. There is no net loss of draft choices, just a delay.

There was an extra first rounder in 2007 (Max Pacioretty) and a lost 1st rounder in 2008 (John Carlson?). The net change is null as well.

 

[hototogisu]

Timmins did get fewer 2nd rounders in the period 2008-2011 ... but he got them all back in 2012 and 2013. There is no net loss of draft choices, just a delay.

Well there is the relatively unquantifiable variable of "good drafts" vs. "bad drafts". As a broad, extreme example, losing a first rounder in 2003 would have hurt a heck of a lot more than losing a first rounder in 1999.

Just playing devil's advocate, on the whole I think your point is well taken.

There was an extra first rounder in 2007 (Max Pacioretty) and a lost 1st rounder in 2008 (John Carlson?). The net change is null as well.

Greg Nemisz.

If Carlson had been taken with our pick you can be damn sure people wouldn't let that go

 

[Whitesnake]

The so little picks argument fails for two reasons:

1) The lack of 9th round draft choices is irrelevant.
2) The Habs do lose 2nd rounders some years, but they gain them in other years. This has the affect of shifting the expectations in time, but not adjusting them.

Timmins did get fewer 2nd rounders in the period 2008-2011 ... but he got them all back in 2012 and 2013. There is no net loss of draft choices, just a delay.

There was an extra first rounder in 2007 (Max Pacioretty) and a lost 1st rounder in 2008 (John Carlson?). The net change is null as well.

I totally agree with you. I did mention that if people think that the pick in round 7 is total crapshoot, I can't belive what they think about picking in the round 11.....

Thing is, I guess that their point will be to say that to compensate for the lack of picks between 08-11, we'll then have to wait for the 2012 and 2013 to have a clearer picture. Fine with me. We can do that too.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Patches Chucky Radulov
Lekhonen Pleks Gally
Byron Danault Shaw
Flynn Mitchell Carr
Andreghetto

Emelin Weber
Markov Petry
Beaulieu Redmond
Barberio Pateryn

Price Montoya

In case you're wondering what the names in red mean, they're players acquired by MB. Does that look like a roster that is being maintained and not built?

Everyone is entitled to their opinions but they shouldn't pretend to back up those opinions with made up factoids.

Well said. MB has done a wonderful job considering the realistic circumstances has has been dealing with.

Lets look at Trevor Timmons draft history since taking the job in the 2002-2003 season

1st round picks: Kostitsyn (10), Chipchura (18), Price (5), Fischer (20), McDonagh (12), Pacioretty (22), Leblanc (18), Tinordi (22), Beaulieu (17), Galchenyuk (3), McCarron (25), Scherbak (26), Juulsen (26), Sergachev (9). The picks have not been bad but we have to wait to see how the last 4 1st round picks make out in the next 2 years.

2nd round picks or higher that ended up being impact players: Lapierre (61), Emelin (84), Grabovski (150), Latendresse (45), White (66), Subban (43), Gallagher (147), De La Rose (34), Lehkonen (55),

Before you criticize TT and how good or bad he is, Do this for all other 29 teams and see how many impact NHL'er they have drafted. All teams have bad draft years. The difference between a good drafting team and a bad one is how they do from the middle of the 1st round and later.

When TT has gotten at top 10 pick, he has done very well. After looking in more depth, I believe he has done very well in the last few years compared to his 1st few years but the truth will be told over time.