Trevor Timmins - The day they made me draft Louis Leblanc....

[Habs100]

You missed likely the best one....Primeau

Are you being sarcastic or are you high on Cayden. He had a good season stats wise.

2017-18

Northeastern Univ.

NCAA

32

1.86

.933

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Whitesnake]

The game during the eras you mentioned was also different than during the "clutch & grab" era and its aftermath. I see the current game as restoring hockey as it used to be and was meant to be. Rocket Richard was 5"8 or 5"9? He may have at best been a 20 goal scorer in the clutch and grab era. It was sad, and horrible to watch. It's what led people like Tiger Woods to say "I don't think any one watches hockey anymore."

The good news is, this year has been much better. The calling of hooking the hands has made a big difference. Once the players were getting so big and fast there was no room out there to handle the puck. The initial clamping down on hooking made a bit of an impact. This latest clamping down on hooking to the hands has also made that much of a difference.

Again, teams did draft smaller and skills guys during whatever era you want to present. But your argument is that those teams were lucky that they did pan out or that the league changed its course. I don't agree. Skills players will always go through whatever era you present to them. It's the biggest and slowest guys that can't go through any era. Again, the year we drafted the big Tinordi, before and during those draft years, other teams had seen what needed to be seen. We didn't. As simple as that.

 

[Whitesnake]

You are right, our drafting is pretty solid. That’s not the issue. It’s how they develop once we get them on the farm.

I will not agree that it's pretty solid. As of now, you mostly have the 2005 and 2007 years going for us. And you add Gallagher, Galchenyuk and Sergachev after that. Then, it's filled with promises, just like most teams in the league are. And the teams that might not look as good as we do prospect pool wise are there because they have been REALLY competing for cups. The only other team that looks like us are the Rangers, and yet, while I keep seeing all those excuses for Timmins, I rarely see excuse for their drafting group saying how they didn't have a 1st rounder from 2013 to 2016. Only had 4 picks in 2012. And when they did have 1st picks, from 2006 to today, they only had 2 top 10 picks.

 

[Habs100]

Again, teams did draft smaller and skills guys during whatever era you want to present. But your argument is that those teams were lucky that they did pan out or that the league changed its course. I don't agree. Skills players will always go through whatever era you present to them. It's the biggest and slowest guys that can't go through any era. Again, the year we drafted the big Tinordi, before and during those draft years, other teams had seen what needed to be seen. We didn't. As simple as that.

We were one of those teams drafting some small players. We drafted Gallagher that year. He had just scored like 50 goals in the WHL. No way he lasts until the 5th round in today's NHL. He was passed over 4 teams by all teams because of his size. Again it was definitely an issue in that era. We also drafted Grabovski, Streit, Y. Weber, and Subban. And later guys like Hudon, Lehkonen, Reway, and Andrighetto. Streit was let go because he was thought to be too small to play D. We played him at forward most of the time. No way in a million years that happens in today's game.

The Rangers, Senators and our management have all publicly said they want to get quicker. Back when we drafted Tinordi, everyone was saying we need to get bigger. When Bergevin came in he said we need to get bigger. You will never hear a team saying they want to get bigger now. We're also lucky the league has changed. No way Hudon makes it in the old NHL. And, everyone was worried Gallagher wouldn't last due to his size and style of play in the old NHL. Now, his biggest health risk is hand injuries due to blocked shots.

The game has changed tremendously since then. And back then, even teams that would use a pick here or there to draft a smaller player, were under pressure to draft for size. I also hated the Tinordi pick at the time. But most Hab fans loved it. "We finally have that big bruising defenseman." "Smurfs no more" is all you heard. Do you remember that our nickname was "the smurfs" around the league? In 2008, Gainey traded for the rights to negotiate with Sundin. I remember the Leafs discussion board they were joking about how Sundin wouldn't fit in at the smurfs camp, his legs would be too long for the bed, he wouldn't be able to even fit into a Habs jersey, etc... Even almost all fans in the city (I wasn't one of them) wanted us to get bigger.

It was a totally different era and that pick was made to be competitive in that era.

 

[Habs100]

I will not agree that it's pretty solid. As of now, you mostly have the 2005 and 2007 years going for us. And you add Gallagher, Galchenyuk and Sergachev after that. Then, it's filled with promises, just like most teams in the league are. And the teams that might not look as good as we do prospect pool wise are there because they have been REALLY competing for cups. The only other team that looks like us are the Rangers, and yet, while I keep seeing all those excuses for Timmins, I rarely see excuse for their drafting group saying how they didn't have a 1st rounder from 2013 to 2016. Only had 4 picks in 2012. And when they did have 1st picks, from 2006 to today, they only had 2 top 10 picks.

I doesn't matter whether he found the 4 foundational pieces (Price, Subban, McDonagh, and Pacioretty) in 2 years or over 4 years. He still found them. And if our GMs hadn't traded them away in losing trades, we'd be contenders. Those 4 guys are all in their prime now and we should be enjoying seeing those guys in their prime along with the young guys Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Sergachev, Juulsen, Mete, Scherbak, Hudon, Lehkonen, etc... All Bergevin had to do was resign Radulov and Markov and not trade away Subban and we're contenders.

Timmins gets the blame for the failure of the GMs. You don't lose assets like McDonagh, Subban, Sergachev, and Raduov and remain competitive, unless you expect your scouts to draft two championship caliber teams so you can burn through 4 key pieces without missing a beat.

 

[Habs100]

I will not agree that it's pretty solid. As of now, you mostly have the 2005 and 2007 years going for us. And you add Gallagher, Galchenyuk and Sergachev after that. Then, it's filled with promises, just like most teams in the league are. And the teams that might not look as good as we do prospect pool wise are there because they have been REALLY competing for cups. The only other team that looks like us are the Rangers, and yet, while I keep seeing all those excuses for Timmins, I rarely see excuse for their drafting group saying how they didn't have a 1st rounder from 2013 to 2016. Only had 4 picks in 2012. And when they did have 1st picks, from 2006 to today, they only had 2 top 10 picks.

By the way Whitesnake: there's no doubt 2008-2011 were bad drafting years. And, as you said, before them you were a Timmins fan. But the drafting has been good from 2012 to the present. Enjoy Poehling, Cayden Primeau (goalie of the year in his conference as a freshman), Ikonen, and the 4 WHL d prospects we got last year. No way he's going to draft plugs like McCarron and Tinordi anymore. There's no pressure to get bigger.

Timmins' track record shows he can find good players at every position except center. I'm in favor of brining in another scout who has last word on centers. But he's drafted a core of players that would be contenders if our GMs hadn't screwed up. I don't want to throw away the baby with the bath water. Keep him in the organization and bring in a new scout who's in charge of drafting centers.

 

[Price is Wright]

The drafting has been average since 2012. Calling it great when the only definite top six guy is Galchenyuk and the only definite top four is Sergachev is wrong. Great would be a superstar per year. Good is an NHLer per year. It's at best good. We could still see a lot of guys burn out. Nothing is guaranteed for the likes of Hudon, Mete, DLR, McCarron, Juulsen, Lehkonen, and even Scherbak. None of the guys in development could come up. Nothing in the great section right now.

 

[Whitesnake]

By the way Whitesnake: there's no doubt 2008-2011 were bad drafting years. And, as you said, before them you were a Timmins fan. But the drafting has been good from 2012 to the present. Enjoy Poehling, Cayden Primeau (goalie of the year in his conference as a freshman), Ikonen, and the 4 WHL d prospects we got last year. No way he's going to draft plugs like McCarron and Tinordi anymore. There's no pressure to get bigger.

Timmins' track record shows he can find good players at every position except center. I'm in favor of brining in another scout who has last word on centers. But he's drafted a core of players that would be contenders if our GMs hadn't screwed up. I don't want to throw away the baby with the bath water. Keep him in the organization and bring in a new scout who's in charge of drafting centers.

Even if you think that Poehling, Primeau and whatever will be awesome...we still have no proofs of that at all. I talk about how impressive Tolvanen is and I'M being given this "but he has issues in his game" statements. How the heck can we, from one end, give names that are absolutely not proven at the NHL level, or not even pro level as if they are already proven? The day we start doing that, I will give you 20 players per organization that might have just as great a chance and I'll use whatever reasons. Mind you, I am NOT downplaying what our kids are doing. Poehling looks great. What Primeau has done is nothing short but spectacular. But in no way does that mean what they'll do as pros. Let just be glad for what they do right now. But you cannot use that success as a proof that Timmins IS great at drafting.

 

[Habs100]

Even if you think that Poehling, Primeau and whatever will be awesome...we still have no proofs of that at all. I talk about how impressive Tolvanen is and I'M being given this "but he has issues in his game" statements. How the heck can we, from one end, give names that are absolutely not proven at the NHL level, or not even pro level as if they are already proven? The day we start doing that, I will give you 20 players per organization that might have just as great a chance and I'll use whatever reasons. Mind you, I am NOT downplaying what our kids are doing. Poehling looks great. What Primeau has done is nothing short but spectacular. But in no way does that mean what they'll do as pros. Let just be glad for what they do right now. But you cannot use that success as a proof that Timmins IS great at drafting.

My hope Timmins is "back on track" is based more on 2012: Galchenyuk and Hudon, 2014: Scherbak 26th overall, 2015: Juulsen 26th overall, 2016: Sergachev and Mete. These recent drafts have been good.

The fact that he hasn't made it happen with centers says to me we need to bring someone in to have final say on centers, but it doesn't say to me we have to get rid of Timmins. Keep Timmins for all he's given us in goal, on D, and on the wing. Not many scouts have done better on D and in goal, if any. And now that he's not going to be looking for size just for size's sake it only bodes more well. Don't make him pay for our terrible GMs and their terrible mistakes. He drafted enough for us to be perennial contenders.

 

[Whitesnake]

I doesn't matter whether he found the 4 foundational pieces (Price, Subban, McDonagh, and Pacioretty) in 2 years or over 4 years. He still found them. And if our GMs hadn't traded them away in losing trades, we'd be contenders. Those 4 guys are all in their prime now and we should be enjoying seeing those guys in their prime along with the young guys Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Sergachev, Juulsen, Mete, Scherbak, Hudon, Lehkonen, etc... All Bergevin had to do was resign Radulov and Markov and not trade away Subban and we're contenders.

Timmins gets the blame for the failure of the GMs. You don't lose assets like McDonagh, Subban, Sergachev, and Raduov and remain competitive, unless you expect your scouts to draft two championship caliber teams so you can burn through 4 key pieces without missing a beat.

We still have Price. We still have Pacioretty. Subban has been transformed into Shea Weber. So the only real loss in a trade was McDonagh. It's another myth that needs to stop....the fact that Timmins's entire work has been stolen by stupid trades. One move was. We don't agree with Subban trade sure...but it's not like we acquired Patrick Traverse for him. And again, you cannot use Juulsen, Mete, Scherbak, and Co as a proof of incredible drafting. Those guys have NO numbers yet. Full of promise...maybe....but there are tons of players that showed promise signs that never materialized. Don't worry in 5-7 years, we WILL review Timmins work...and maybe we WILL be able to add those names in the great picks he made...but you absolutely cannot do that here. Them playing in the NHL does NOT mean Timmins is great. It means he does recognize who could play in the NHL but it also means how weak we are. As amongst those guys...who plays a key role RIGHT NOW? Galchy, Gallagher....that's it. Sergachev would have...but we wouldn't have seen it this year.

And it's absolutely false. Timmins do NOT get the blame for the failure of the GM's. We've been bashing Gauthier and GAiney like there's no tomorrow. We are bashing the clown of Bergevin like nobody else was bashed before. What Timmins received is his fine share of blame. But he is CLEARLY not bashed as much as the other GM's. And frankly, in the end, it's been 15 years that this guy is here. Whether we believe it's his fault, not entirely his fault, his fault a little, or even not his fault at all, the thought process could still be to change the face of the drafting and go for somebody else that do have success. There are surely plenty of those scouts out there that are just waiting to be a head scout. And could do as good a job as Timmins does. It's insane to talk about him as if he is totally replaceable and still have the weaknesses that we have. And yes, it does matter in how many years or since when you found them. 'Cause because deals happen, 'cause because great deals but bad deals might happen and it's the name of the game, you neeed to renew yourself at the most regular pace possible. And not finding a top players in 11 years will put some holes in your lineup.

 

[Habs100]

We still have Price. We still have Pacioretty. Subban has been transformed into Shea Weber. So the only real loss in a trade was McDonagh. It's another myth that needs to stop....the fact that Timmins's entire work has been stolen by stupid trades. One move was. We don't agree with Subban trade sure...but it's not like we acquired Patrick Traverse for him. And again, you cannot use Juulsen, Mete, Scherbak, and Co as a proof of incredible drafting. Those guys have NO numbers yet. Full of promise...maybe....but there are tons of players that showed promise signs that never materialized. Don't worry in 5-7 years, we WILL review Timmins work...and maybe we WILL be able to add those names in the great picks he made...but you absolutely cannot do that here. Them playing in the NHL does NOT mean Timmins is great. It means he does recognize who could play in the NHL but it also means how weak we are. As amongst those guys...who plays a key role RIGHT NOW? Galchy, Gallagher....that's it. Sergachev would have...but we wouldn't have seen it this year.

And it's absolutely false. Timmins do NOT get the blame for the failure of the GM's. We've been bashing Gauthier and GAiney like there's no tomorrow. We are bashing the clown of Bergevin like nobody else was bashed before. What Timmins received is his fine share of blame. But he is CLEARLY not bashed as much as the other GM's. And frankly, in the end, it's been 15 years that this guy is here. Whether we believe it's his fault, not entirely his fault, his fault a little, or even not his fault at all, the thought process could still be to change the face of the drafting and go for somebody else that do have success. There are surely plenty of those scouts out there that are just waiting to be a head scout. And could do as good a job as Timmins does. It's insane to talk about him as if he is totally replaceable and still have the weaknesses that we have. And yes, it does matter in how many years or since when you found them. 'Cause because deals happen, 'cause because great deals but bad deals might happen and it's the name of the game, you neeed to renew yourself at the most regular pace possible. And not finding a top players in 11 years will put some holes in your lineup.

We don't have McDonagh, and instead of Subban we have past his prime Weber. Instead of Sergachev we have Drouin. And the GM has brought in no one exceptional, and he even lost one of the organization's gems (Markov). If the GM had brought in just 1 player (resigned Radulov) and not lost Markov and you combine that with having Timmins' picks in the lineup (McDonagh, Subban, and Sergachev), we're contenders. Timmins did his job. Bergevin didn't do his.

 

[Price is Wright]

Timmins did his job. Bergevin didn't do his.

How many top six centres has Timmins drafted for Montreal since 2003? That's 14 drafts.

 

[Habs100]

How many top six centres has Timmins drafted for Montreal since 2003? That's 14 drafts.

You take the best player available. We have enough from the drafts to be contenders. How many top six centers did Nashville draft????

Their GM traded Seth Jones for Johansen and Samuel Girard for Kyle Turris - oh and aging Weber for prime Subban. Ours traded Sergachev for Drouin and McDonagh for Gomez - and of course prime Subban for past his prime Weber.

That's the difference.

 

[Price is Wright]

You take the best player available.

So you feel in 14 drafts that Timmins always took the best player available and that was either the best centre available or the best player available in which a centre it wasn't?

Why is it after 14 years that a centre was never the best player available for Timmins with exception to Galchenyuk and Grabovski?

(Also BPA doesn't work when we took Fischer over Giroux and Tinordi over Kuznetsov)

 

[Whitesnake]

We were one of those teams drafting some small players. We drafted Gallagher that year. He had just scored like 50 goals in the WHL. No way he lasts until the 5th round in today's NHL. He was passed over 4 teams by all teams because of his size. Again it was definitely an issue in that era. We also drafted Grabovski, Streit, Y. Weber, and Subban. And later guys like Hudon, Lehkonen, Reway, and Andrighetto. Streit was let go because he was thought to be too small to play D. We played him at forward most of the time. No way in a million years that happens in today's game.

The Rangers, Senators and our management have all publicly said they want to get quicker. Back when we drafted Tinordi, everyone was saying we need to get bigger. When Bergevin came in he said we need to get bigger. You will never hear a team saying they want to get bigger now. We're also lucky the league has changed. No way Hudon makes it in the old NHL. And, everyone was worried Gallagher wouldn't last due to his size and style of play in the old NHL. Now, his biggest health risk is hand injuries due to blocked shots.

The game has changed tremendously since then. And back then, even teams that would use a pick here or there to draft a smaller player, were under pressure to draft for size. I also hated the Tinordi pick at the time. But most Hab fans loved it. "We finally have that big bruising defenseman." "Smurfs no more" is all you heard. Do you remember that our nickname was "the smurfs" around the league? In 2008, Gainey traded for the rights to negotiate with Sundin. I remember the Leafs discussion board they were joking about how Sundin wouldn't fit in at the smurfs camp, his legs would be too long for the bed, he wouldn't be able to even fit into a Habs jersey, etc... Even almost all fans in the city (I wasn't one of them) wanted us to get bigger.

It was a totally different era and that pick was made to be competitive in that era.

And again, you disregard the examples I gave you. All those smallish kids went in the 1st round. You can name me small kids that went further, I will name you big kids that went further too. Why did Guillaume Latendresse fell to 45? Jonathan Filewich was drafted 3rd round while being PPG in his draft year. And tons of examples like that. By the way, in TODAY'S NHL, do you know who else went late in their respective drafts? Why did Seth Griffith went in the 5th round with the season he had in his draft year? Hudon? Gemel Smith? Leipsic? Point? Bjork? Lehkonen? Arvidsson? Gaudreau? I can go on and on and on....there are so many small skilled players that ALSO went late in the supposed today's NHL.....So in today's NHL, yes, there are still smallish players that were, are and will be drafted late. 'Cause the rank they are drafted has nothing to do with how they look now...but how they project later. I have no idea why you keep fighting the original premise. The point originally was..."Tinordi was drafted 'cause that's what was drafted at that time". I have proven times and times again that while there were big players chosen around that time, smaller players were too. So it's FALSE that only Timmins type of players were selected at that time. It never was. To this day, if you are able to get your hands on a total package that ends up being big...you will STILL choose that guy over a smaller one. Clutch and grabbing notwithstanding.

And enough with the "this guy wouldn't have made it". We have no idea. Luc Robitaille also was not suppose to make it. And so on.

By the way, people who would say things like "we finally have the big bruising d-man" and "smurfs no more" people...you shouldn't listen to them. 'Cause if they believe that being picked automatically means making it.....don't waste your time with those.

 

[Habs100]

So you feel in 14 drafts that Timmins always took the best player available and that was either the best centre available or the best player available in which a centre it wasn't?

Why is it after 14 years that a centre was never the best player available for Timmins with exception to Galchenyuk and Grabovski?

(Also BPA doesn't work when we took Fischer over Giroux and Tinordi over Kuznetsov)

Just answer the question about Nashville. Are they contenders? Yes. Did they draft great centers? No. They drafted many great dmen, as Timmins has done. And, their GM turned our great d picks into horse manoure. That's why we are where we are now. Give us back Markov, Subban, and a Johanssen and a Kyle Turris instead of McDonagh and Sergachev (probably a better d combo than Girard Jones), and just resign Radulov (can we ask our GM to have just 1 good free agent signing, is that too much to ask???) and we're contenders.

 

[Habs100]

And again, you disregard the examples I gave you. All those smallish kids went in the 1st round. You can name me small kids that went further, I will name you big kids that went further too. Why did Guillaume Latendresse fell to 45? Jonathan Filewich was drafted 3rd round while being PPG in his draft year. And tons of examples like that. By the way, in TODAY'S NHL, do you know who else went late in their respective drafts? Why did Seth Griffith went in the 5th round with the season he had in his draft year? Hudon? Gemel Smith? Leipsic? Point? Bjork? Lehkonen? Arvidsson? Gaudreau? I can go on and on and on....there are so many small skilled players that ALSO went late in the supposed today's NHL.....So in today's NHL, yes, there are still smallish players that were, are and will be drafted late. 'Cause the rank they are drafted has nothing to do with how they look now...but how they project later. I have no idea why you keep fighting the original premise. The point originally was..."Tinordi was drafted 'cause that's what was drafted at that time". I have proven times and times again that while there were big players chosen around that time, smaller players were too. So it's FALSE that only Timmins type of players were selected at that time. It never was. To this day, if you are able to get your hands on a total package that ends up being big...you will STILL choose that guy over a smaller one. Clutch and grabbing notwithstanding.

And enough with the "this guy wouldn't have made it". We have no idea. Luc Robitaille also was not suppose to make it. And so on.

By the way, people who would say things like "we finally have the big bruising d-man" and "smurfs no more" people...you shouldn't listen to them. 'Cause if they believe that being picked automatically means making it.....don't waste your time with those.

If you don't think the game has changed and that changes who makes it and who becomes a star, you're entitled to your opinion. I totally disagree. I just don't have time to go through examples ad infinitum. It's pretty obvious to me.

 

[Whitesnake]

You take the best player available. We have enough from the drafts to be contenders. How many top six centers did Nashville draft????

Their GM traded Seth Jones for Johansen and Samuel Girard for Kyle Turris - oh and aging Weber for prime Subban. Ours traded Sergachev for Drouin and McDonagh for Gomez - and of course prime Subban for past his prime Weber.

That's the difference.

I didn't agree with the Subban trade....but if we don't acquire Weber, what kinda of D we have? So here's a depth problem. You fix one, here comes another one. AT one point, the draft needs to help you. Just like Tampa, you lose Drouin, you gain Point. This Habs team lack depth. And that depth you build it through the draft. Only McDonagh was not used the proper way. But that's 11 years ago.

 

[Whitesnake]

If you don't think the game has changed and that changes who makes it and who becomes a star, you're entitled to your opinion. I totally disagree. I just don't have time to go through examples ad infinitum. It's pretty obvious to me.

I didn't say that the game hasn't changed. I said that despite the change, you still could be effective while being small. As there are tons of examples given. Examples I took the time to give. You said that there's no way Gallagher would have been picked in the 5th round if it was in the new NHL. And yet, there are TONS of examples of TOP scoring players that are STILL to this day being drafted in the 4th and 5th round. Not sure why you disregard this.I'm just totally responding to your points here.

Tyler Steenbergen. 51 goals in 2016. 90 points. 5th rounder in 2017 by Arizona.

 

[Habs100]

I didn't agree with the Subban trade....but if we don't acquire Weber, what kinda of D we have? So here's a depth problem. You fix one, here comes another one. AT one point, the draft needs to help you. Just like Tampa, you lose Drouin, you gain Point. This Habs team lack depth. And that depth you build it through the draft. Only McDonagh was not used the proper way. But that's 11 years ago.

McDonagh would be one of our prime pieces now or could have been used to get one.

Bottom line, I have a yes or no question for you: is the following lineup a contending team yes or no?

Pacioretty Danault Radulov
Scherbak Galchenyuk Gallagher
Lehkonen Plekanec Hudon
A. Shaw/Carr De la Rose/Froese Byron/Deslaurier

Markov Subban
McDonagh Petry
Sergachev Juulsen
Mete, Benn, Reilly

Price
Niemi/Lindgren

and with a good GM you convert McDonagh and Sergachev into a Johansen and Turris (McDonagh and Sergachev are arguably a better pair than Seth Jones and Samuel Girard)

 

[Whitesnake]

McDonagh would be one of our prime pieces now or could have been used to get one.

Bottom line, I have a yes or no question for you: is the following lineup a contending team yes or no?

Pacioretty Danault Radulov
Scherbak Galchenyuk Gallagher
Lehkonen Plekanec Hudon
A. Shaw/Carr De la Rose/Froese Byron/Deslaurier

Markov Subban
McDonagh Petry
Sergachev Juulsen
Mete, Benn, Reilly

Price
Niemi/Lindgren

and with a good GM you convert McDonagh and Sergachev into a Johansen and Turris (McDonagh and Sergachev are arguably a better pair than Seth Jones and Samuel Girard)

Well obviously not with Danaultu as a #1 centerman. No. Galchenyuk, they don't trust him to be a centerman. So you can place him there if you want, it wouldn't have happened. Scherbak is totally unproven and in a moment when you want to test him, you have to bench him 'cause you don't appreciate his effort. Contending for what? Playoffs. Maybe. Cup? Of course not.

By the way, the point here is to say how our GM's were awful. Yes. They were. But as a head scout, you still have to do better than he did.

 

[Habs100]

Well obviously not with Danaultu as a #1 centerman. No. Galchenyuk, they don't trust him to be a centerman. So you can place him there if you want, it wouldn't have happened. Scherbak is totally unproven and in a moment when you want to test him, you have to bench him 'cause you don't appreciate his effort. Contending for what? Playoffs. Maybe. Cup? Of course not.

Ok that's where we disagree.

I think that lineup is a contending lineup and if the forward corp does prove to not be good enough than you trade McDonagh and Sergachev for Johanssen and Turris types and it becomes good enough. The D core is good enough with Subban Markov, Petry Emelin, Beaulieu/Benn/Reilly/Mete .

 

[Whitesnake]

Ok that's where we disagree.

I think that lineup is a contending lineup and if the forward corp does prove to not be good enough than you trade McDonagh and Sergachev for Johanssen and Turris types and it becomes good enough. The D core is good enough with Subban Markov, Petry Emelin, Beaulieu/Benn/Reilly/Mete .

Nashville lost Suter for nothing. Nashville lost RAdulov for nothing. They lose Hornqvist, but gained James Neal who they lost.....for nothing. I hear you and it's really as if the Habs are the only ones who have lost a trade they couldn't recuperate of and then Timmins couldn't do a single thing about it. And yet...Nashville is seen as a really deep team. Why? 'Cause after drafting Suter, They drafted Weber, Klein, Josi, Ellis, Ekholm, Jones and Girard. And even some D fillers in Franson and Bittetto. That's what build depth.

 

[Whitesnake]

Ok that's where we disagree.

I think that lineup is a contending lineup and if the forward corp does prove to not be good enough than you trade McDonagh and Sergachev for Johanssen and Turris types and it becomes good enough. The D core is good enough with Subban Markov, Petry Emelin, Beaulieu/Benn/Reilly/Mete .

It's an hypothetical scenario that could go either way. I could say that neither Pacioretty nor Price has proven to be playoffs material, but you could reply that with the guys we let go, they would have proven it to which I'd say.....well....maybe? What's the point here? It's being part of an hockey team...with his bad and good moves. But your job as a scouting group is to provide great players every year. Does that happen every year? Of course not. 'Cause that's the name of the game. But at one point, when your biggeset success are 12 years old....you know that there is a problem and that you know why you can't build depth.

 

[Price is Wright]

Just answer the question about Nashville.

Your question dodge is admitting Timmins has been an absolute failure at scouting centres. 14 years of failing to draft centres. Galchenyuk, Grabovski, and probably Poehling after 14 years of picks. That's a failure.

Nashville has had the same head of scouting since 2011. If he goes 10 years and the best centre he drafts is Colton Sissons he should be fired as well. Hellberg instead of Karlsson or Rask was a failure. Same to drafting Tinordi over Coyle and Kuznetsov.