Trevor Timmins Part III

[Chili]

Go beyond drafting or development for a second.

At a certain point, the onus is on the player to make their own way just like a bird leaving the nest.

There are only 700 odd NHL jobs and many are held by incumbents.

The vast majority of 'prospects' are missing something or they would be NHL players.

It's up to them to know their weaknesses and work hard to improve on them. I think it's also important to know to what NHL role they best project and work towards that.

 

[CauZuki]

anyone think he has true 1st line upside?

As much as:
Trunev/Avtsin/Kristo/Collberg/Andrighetto/Vejdemo

 

[jaffy27]

As much as:
Trunev/Avtsin/Kristo/Collberg/Andrighetto/Vejdemo

Not one first round pick amongst your list.....nice parallel.

 

[CauZuki]

Not one first round pick amongst your list.....nice parallel.

When you're right you're right buddy :

Chipchura/Fischer/Leblanc/Tinordi/Beaulieu/Scherbak/McCarron.

 

[Big Lurk]

You are right buddy :

Chipchura/Fischer/Leblanc/Tinordi/Beaulieu/Scherbak/McCarron.

Ouch

 

[jaffy27]

You are right buddy :

Chipchura/Fischer/Leblanc/Tinordi/Beaulieu/Scherbak/McCarron.

That's more like it.....now if only anyone actually thought they'd be first line players. All your forwards were projected to be 2nd and 3rd liners. Scherbak is still on the fence.

Poehling will be a 2nd line centre btw

 

[Belial]

When you're right you're right buddy :

Chipchura/Fischer/Leblanc/Tinordi/Beaulieu/Scherbak/McCarron.

Someone asks if Poehling has first line upside and you come up with a list of 3 defencemen two wingers and 2 guys that were projected as third line centers the day they were drafted? Your point?

 

[CauZuki]

Someone asks if Poehling has first line upside and you come up with a list of 3 defencemen two wingers and 2 guys that were projected as third line centers the day they were drafted? Your point?

That we have been overly optimistic about our late 1st rounder potential for years now and they rarely pan out.

I am doing this thing called tempering my expectations.

Feel free to pencil him into the 2nd line for next year while you're at it should be a fun post to bring up in a few years from now.

 

[BaseballCoach]

That we have been overly optimistic about our late 1st rounder potential for years now and they rarely pan out.

I am doing this thing called tempering my expectations.

Feel free to pencil him into the 2nd line for next year while you're at it should be a fun post to bring up in a few years from now.

I would say two more years in the NCAA, as he increasingly dominates his peers, followed by turning pro at 20 and making the club as a bottom 6 out of the gate, eventually hitting the second line in 2-3 more years after maybe a stint or two in Laval if and when he slumps and loses confidence.

 

[LaP]

That we have been overly optimistic about our late 1st rounder potential for years now and they rarely pan out.

I am doing this thing called tempering my expectations.

Feel free to pencil him into the 2nd line for next year while you're at it should be a fun post to bring up in a few years from now.

Well to be honest it's not as bad as it looks. The problem with our 1st rounders is we always compare them with others. Like if they are not the best player of the 1st round outside of the top 5 they *****. We simply can't accept that a 1st rounder who become a 2nd line player is still a success.

From 2003 to 2012 (10 years) :

2003 : AK (good 2nd line player for a while)
2005 : Price (generational goalie)
2007 : McDO (1st pairing dman)
2011 : Beaulieu (3rd pairing dman who could still become more)
2012 : 1st line winger

So 50% of the picks from 2003 to 2012 became useful players. All the picks since 2013 could make the NHL none of them are clear flop for now.

 

[CauZuki]

Well to be honest it's not as bad as it looks. The problem with our 1st rounders is we always compare them with others. Like if they are not the best player of the 1st round outside of the top 5 they *****. We simply can't accept that a 1st rounder who become a 2nd line player is still a success.

From 2003 to 2012 (10 years) :

2003 : AK (good 2nd line player for a while...I'm a big AK fan but did you just bring up one of the best drafts in history)
2005 : Price (generational goalie) (5th overall)
2007 : McDO (1st pairing dman) (Traded away but that's fine he ended up being good)
2011 : Beaulieu (3rd pairing dman who could still become more..maybe)
2012 : 1st line winger (3rd overall)

So 50% of the picks from 2003 to 2012 became useful players. All the picks since 2013 could make the NHL none of them are clear flop for now.

I bolded my answers and the results seem to be unless we have a top 5 pick over the last 10 years we have a traded Beaulieu and McDonaugh to show for it?

Doesn't seem as positive as you are making it sound.

 

[Lebowski]

I bolded my answers and the results seem to be unless we have a top 5 pick over the last 10 years we have a traded Beaulieu and McDonaugh to show for it?

Doesn't seem as positive as you are making it sound.

I mean, that's not exactly the drafting department's problem, is it?

 

[FrankMTL]

I bolded my answers and the results seem to be unless we have a top 5 pick over the last 10 years we have a traded Beaulieu and McDonaugh to show for it?

Doesn't seem as positive as you are making it sound.

Well 2002 to 2005 was fairly good as all 4 first round picks ended up being NHL regulars (Chipchura has played almost 500 NHL games as much as he's been underwhelming).

2006 was a big miss on Fischer but at 20th overall I guess that happens. My problem with that pick was there was all sorts of rumours that this guy didn't interview very well. I don't know if there's any truth to that or not.

2007 was Timmins best draft ever, and I don't think it's really close.

2008 his first pick was at 56th overall which is borderline a 3rd round pick, so no biggie.

My big issue is that between 2009 and 2011 all he was able to get out of his 3 first round picks was a 3rd pairing (we'll see if he ever becomes more than that) defenceman. Those three years really hurt our chances as besides Beaulieu, we only drafted and developed Brendan Gallagher.

2012 was ok as we got Galchenyuk and hopefully Hudon can turn into a decent NHLer

2013 was good as well IMO even though Andrighetto is no longer with us. I think McCarron, Lehkonen and De La Rose will all be solid NHLer's along with the wildcard that is Martin Reway

2014-2017 is too early to tell for now.

 

[76]

That we have been overly optimistic about our late 1st rounder potential for years now and they rarely pan out.

I am doing this thing called tempering my expectations.

Feel free to pencil him into the 2nd line for next year while you're at it should be a fun post to bring up in a few years from now.

You talk a lot. Did you at least watched Poehling play during last week showcase with the best of his group age, with many of the best older than him? Not only the highlights, but the whole games?

 

[CauZuki]

You talk a lot. Did you at least watched Poehling play during last week showcase with the best of his group age, with many of the best older than him? Not only the highlights, but the whole games?

Did I comment on his play or speak to his potential? (hint: I didn't)

All I'm saying is that we've fawned over many supposed top prospects (1st rounder or not) many of which had great showings in WJC/amongst their peers and in training camp. Let's just say history has taught me to remain skeptical and be pleasantly surprised if it works out vs always hoping for every prospect to hit their ceiling. My comments come from reading many posts in this thread comparing his potential to Ryan O'Reilly , Kesler and others. I see nothing wrong with pointing out that we've said the exact same thing about other prospects with "great potential". I'll be glad to bring up the threads with Avtsin/Collberg/Kristo where we thought we had drafted the next coming of Patrick Kane. Don't even have to go very far , Drouin thread has McDavid comparisons and more.

 

[76]

Did I comment on his play or speak to his potential? (hint: I didn't)

All I'm saying is that we've fawned over many supposed top prospects (1st rounder or not) many of which had great showings in WJC/amongst their peers and in training camp. Let's just say history has taught me to remain skeptical and be pleasantly surprised if it works out vs always hoping for every prospect to hit their ceiling. My comments come from reading many posts in this thread comparing his potential to Ryan O'Reilly , Kesler and others. I see nothing wrong with pointing out that we've said the exact same thing about other prospects with "great potential". I'll be glad to bring up the threads with Avtsin/Collberg/Kristo where we thought we had drafted the next coming of Patrick Kane. Don't even have to go very far , Drouin thread has McDavid comparisons and more.

All I wanted to know is if you watched the showcase games last week before commenting on Poehling's future and expectations from fans. Did you?

 

[CauZuki]

All I wanted to know is if you watched the showcase games last week before commenting on Poehling's future and expectations from fans. Did you?

No I did not , as I mentioned I didn't comment on his play or his potential. Regardless of how well he played my opinion is still valid we tend to overvalue our picks and make them out into a lot more than they are. I find it strange that you are quick to jump at my post but posts comparing him to an O'Reilly or Kesler you don't touch or comment on.

Is there a reason why watching this particular prospect play that is going to be different from the dozens of prospects over the last 5+ years that didn't even come close to reaching their potential?

Can't wait for the reply where you dismiss my opinion because I didn't watch the showcase.

 

[jfm133]

Well to be honest it's not as bad as it looks. The problem with our 1st rounders is we always compare them with others. Like if they are not the best player of the 1st round outside of the top 5 they *****. We simply can't accept that a 1st rounder who become a 2nd line player is still a success.

From 2003 to 2012 (10 years) :

2003 : AK (good 2nd line player for a while)
2005 : Price (generational goalie)
2007 : McDO (1st pairing dman)
2011 : Beaulieu (3rd pairing dman who could still become more)
2012 : 1st line winger

So 50% of the picks from 2003 to 2012 became useful players. All the picks since 2013 could make the NHL none of them are clear flop for now.

You forget Pacioretty as first rounder

 

[jfm133]

No I did not , as I mentioned I didn't comment on his play or his potential. Regardless of how well he played my opinion is still valid we tend to overvalue our picks and make them out into a lot more than they are. I find it strange that you are quick to jump at my post but posts comparing him to an O'Reilly or Kesler you don't touch or comment on.

Is there a reason why watching this particular prospect play that is going to be different from the dozens of prospects over the last 5+ years that didn't even come close to reaching their potential?

Can't wait for the reply where you dismiss my opinion because I didn't watch the showcase.

Your example of Trunev/Avtsin/Kristo/Collberg/Andrighetto/Vejdemo was just pure bad faith. So hard to think you put out an honest criticism after that.

Timmins was not good between 2008 and 2011, but he had only seven top-90 picks in four years. This year alone he had five. So yes in those four years he was bad, but it can only be badluck since his number of top-90 was so low. Seven good opportunities to hit something of value were taken away from him.

 

[Teufelsdreck]

I doubt anyone else would have selected Carey Price at #5 overall. That alone should establish his credentials.

 

[scrubadam]

I doubt anyone else would have selected Carey Price at #5 overall. That alone should establish his credentials.

Thats an interesting question.

What if habs passed on Price and took Brule, where does Price go?

Rask was the next goalie taken at 21 by the leafs. So does Price fall to the leafs? Does another team in the top 10 take the risk and draft Price?

The kings took Quick in the 3rd round, would they have chosen Price in the 1st instead of Kopi?

Price was the last of a dying breed, the Goalie taken in the top 10. Since then there has been a few goalies at 11 or 12 but since Price as far as I can tell no goalie has gone top 10 let alone top 5. Compare that to before 05 and we can see some guys going top 5/10/ even in the top 2.

 

[McGuires Corndog]

Thats an interesting question.

What if habs passed on Price and took Brule, where does Price go?

Rask was the next goalie taken at 21 by the leafs. So does Price fall to the leafs? Does another team in the top 10 take the risk and draft Price?

The kings took Quick in the 3rd round, would they have chosen Price in the 1st instead of Kopi?

Price was the last of a dying breed, the Goalie taken in the top 10. Since then there has been a few goalies at 11 or 12 but since Price as far as I can tell no goalie has gone top 10 let alone top 5. Compare that to before 05 and we can see some guys going top 5/10/ even in the top 2.

Someone would have probably still taken him before the Leafs, IMO.

I think it's very interesting how the trend in goaltenders being drafted has change, I think it's very intelligent by the scouts and GMs. Goalies are weird. So much of the position is mental, and in a lot of cases it takes time to forge the mental toughness to become an NHL caliber goaltender. It makes perfect sense that a team with a low pick would take a shot on a forward/Dman who might make an immediate impact or at the very least much sooner.

I'm sure it's only a matter of time before we see another generational goaltender that can crack the top 5 though, eventually the stars will align for it.

 

[scrubadam]

Someone would have probably still taken him before the Leafs, IMO.

I think it's very interesting how the trend in goaltenders being drafted has change, I think it's very intelligent by the scouts and GMs. Goalies are weird. So much of the position is mental, and in a lot of cases it takes time to forge the mental toughness to become an NHL caliber goaltender. It makes perfect sense that a team with a low pick would take a shot on a forward/Dman who might make an immediate impact or at the very least much sooner.

I'm sure it's only a matter of time before we see another generational goaltender that can crack the top 5 though, eventually the stars will align for it.

I think the trend will actually move to more non drafted goalies making teams like we have with Lindgren and Condon.

Goalie position is to hard to predict, has to many other factors involved in their production (is it just the defense making the goalie looked good) for them to become popular again in the first round. Other problem is one of supply and demand. In the end you can only have 2 goalies on your team, 2 in the AHL and 2 in the ECHL. Not many positions to be filled with a lot of players trying to fill them. Look at Fucale and McNiven. If they were forwards they could play on the 3rd or 4th line of the Rocket and work their way up. Now their isn't room in the starting position for them and it doesn't make sense to waste them away as back ups.

That generational goalie will have to be a 6'7 monster who posts sub 1 GAA and .940 % IMO to get top 5 recognition. If the NHL ever makes the nets bigger than I don't think we see a goalie taken before the 5th round ever again.

 

[Adam Michaels]

The Price selection wasn't only a great job by Timmins and his amateur scouting team, but it took balls by the Habs to select him when they had a very hot Jose Theodore at the time.

 

[montreal]

I believe that it was rumored that the Sens wanted Price at 9th.