WeThreeKings
Habs cup - its in the BAG
Timmins has said recently that the biggest thing with experience he has learned is to trust himself. I think those earlier mistakes are mistakes made when we listened to other people and didn't trust his gut.
Article on Trevor Timmins
- Thread starter canadiensnation
- Start date
Habnot
Registered User
Absolutely, but so do all other Head scouts.
Key though is over time, are you able to draft impact players at key positions without benefiting multiple consecutive first round picks.
TT has managed to draft a premier goalie, premier defenseman and 2 premier forwards. He's done his job.
Agree 100%. Just trying to say that people often say "Timmins liked this guy, imagine he drafted him, someone from management probably got in the way!!!"
But when he drafts the good guy "all timmins!!!"
At a certain point it's important to realize he's human and he and his staff make projections and sometimes there are mistakes, same with other scouts.
Of course, Timmins has a good success rate.
One thing I dislike more than Kosty was Maxwell...drafted right after was Lucic. Would've been nice.
Habnot
Registered User
I go back to 2003 second round - Cory Urquart - instead of Patrice Bergeron or Shea Weber.
Timmins certainly got better as the years passed. A few early homeruns, but he certainly developped his consistency.
McCarron pick certainly proves to doubters wrong. Galchenyuk was a bit easier, but still an interrogation point for many. Scherbak may prove to be another late steal: Timmins didnt see what many projected.into the young Russian.
McCarron pick certainly proves to doubters wrong. Galchenyuk was a bit easier, but still an interrogation point for many. Scherbak may prove to be another late steal: Timmins didnt see what many projected.into the young Russian.
S Bah
Registered User
Perfection in itself is completely impossible, so why is it that people always point out imperfections of talented people, as if they alone are capable of something that can't be achieved, it's a mystery worth trying to solve! Only thing is I don't have enough time this week, call back when time permits, and hopefully the answer will present itself.
"They wanted to solidify the center position and they did not believe that Ryan would develop as it did."
Don't you mean 'he' as is Gainey only? Because 'they' would suggest perhaps Gauthier among other upper management were involved in decision process.
ProspectsFanatic
Registered User
- Nov 13, 2012
- 3,699
- 2,428
donghabs98
Moderator
To be fair all scouts make mistakes and errors. I think the question is more of which ones make the least amount. TT's mistakes can be made up by the amount of other good decisions he has made. I look at a team like the Oilers who despite having high picks never seem to draft well beyond those high picks. Given what he has Timmins has done a good job and he has made mistakes along the way but at least he has made up for it with some of his other picks.
It really shows how centralizing the previous management team was. One of the things I like so much about the new management team is that they are always willing to get everyone involved in the decision making. When signing or trading prospects away it should make sense that a GM would talk to his Director of Amateur scouting before making a move. I would think Bergevin got some opinion on Colberg before moving him for Vanek.
Scintillating10
Registered User
Good article...shutters one to think we almost had Giroux and McDonough on this team we have now.
Habitant#1
Registered User
Of course he's going to say language was a factor with the Leblanc pick. What else is he going to say? That's he legitimately believed Leblanc (a huge bust) was going to be better than Kreider (first line PF)? The guy wants to keep his job, he's gotta minimize his mistakes!
Love his work overall though!
Love his work overall though!
Vi Nc E x13x
Registered User
Id like to hear what he has to say about current prospects and what he sees them developing into
He did feel Leblanc would be good. Don't get it twisted, he's not using a cop out here. He's just saying there was other people he looked at but admitted he and the organization chose Leblanc likely given similar upside.
Whitesnake
If you rebuild, they will come.
- Jan 5, 2003
- 89,494
- 36,882
Yet, Habs saw him, address his condition and in no way was there ever a question about his condition being tough to control, there was no known epilepsy crisis Kostitsyn had to live through. Was there ever even an epilepsy problem prior to being drafted? Condition was surely there...but did Kostitsyn missed a lengthy of time because of it? Just find it hard to believe. And frankly, we've seen numerous reports about other agencies, nobody had him in their top 10, and nobody mentioned as a reason his epilepsy.
So again, for some teams, epilepsy was the reason why they didn't draft him and yet for the Habs, while they LOVED other players just as much as Kostitsyn, it wasn't a reason not to pick him? In a draft so deep? He'd take the chance that the epilepsy would be impossible to control? It was probably ONE of the reasons running around....but I won't believe it was THE decisive factor for any of the teams.
Whitesnake
If you rebuild, they will come.
- Jan 5, 2003
- 89,494
- 36,882
Again, the supposed epilepsy factor could have been one of the problems but I will never believe it was THE decisve one. Tons of agencies didn't have Kosty in their top 10 and nobody was talking about epilepsy being a decisive factor. But let's pretend it was a decisive factor, let's pretend that this so-called top 3 talent was so great, yet his illness was too grave to be considered before the top 10, Timmins still believed he had to pick him while, to his own admission, he passed on big and talented centermen like Carter and Getzlaf? An illness so grave that #9 couldn't take him, but #10 thought it was good enough despite the high-end talent that was still there? Sorry, I don't get that. Any other years, I'd go for it. Not 2003. And DEFINATELY not after reading that he was immensely interested in Getzlaf and Carter. Amongst ourselves, we were saying how both of those guys were not certainties, that we had no idea how they would develop offensively, and yet our top scout almost took them....surely betting that they would turned out the way they did.
And again, Kostitsyn was seen as a top 3 TALENT. Like Ho-Sang could be seen as a top 5 TALENT. Or any other high-end offensive guys that could play more on the Harlem Globetrotting of hockey than on a real team. So, yes, he had all those moves offensively. Yet...his hockey IQ came coming back. He was seen as having the offensive....but absolutely nothting else and had to know how to play hockey in all the other zones. And then.....how about leagues he was playing in? What did he do before being drafted? Where did he shine? In Belarus and mostly made his name known at the different WJC playing for Belarus. Where his game was all offense but with not a whole lot as his team was...not a whole lot. There had to be some concerns about the opposition he was facing and how strong the leagues he was playing in.
So for me, in ANY OTHER YEAR, might have been a very good risk. Not in 2003. This was already known as deep and talented. It was not the year to risk anything. And ESPECIALLY not when you hesitated with Getzlaf and Carter. I think that this is even worst. I would not have thought he had them in mind. If the idea was between him and Parise for example, well I guess that "not a small forward" could have been enough to go with Kosty. But in what we read now.....it was a bad decision. And has nothing to do with hindsight.
I will give you this though....if you compare this pick to the Fischer's one....Fischer's one was even worst and even less hindsight. A guy NOBODY had in their top 20. And it's even more true when we actually traded that pick knowing full well nobody was interested. Only to fill a need that would never be filled knowing how raw that guy was. They had him pegged top 4 if EVERYTHING would have been going well. And while Fischer had his deal of misfortunes, I think that it's clearly how not dedicated this kid was. Strangely, the "idiot" that some teams have perceived in their interviews pre-draft, wasn't seen like that by us...and it's too bad. Kid might not have been idiot....but there was clearly something wrong, as we've found later on. Since then, teams have picked guys that have the same pedigree than Fischer. A guy like Mark Alt for example. Or Brian Dumoulin. Same type of players....tall, skilled, yet incredibly raw. Which rank were those guys picked? #53 for Alt, #51 for Dumoulin. This is around where Fischer could have been picked, or if your point is that 2006 was far worst than the years those guys were picked...fine. Make Fischer a top 30-40 pick then. Not 20. And if you REALLY want to make a high-risk high-reward pick? 2006 was CLEARLY more the year where you could have spend it in an unidimensionnal small and skilled forwards playing in the Q in a rather ordinairy 2006 draft rather than in an incredible 2003 one....
Last edited:
Habitant#1
Registered User
Didn't mean to imply he was using it as a cop out, but he ultimately made the wrong call so I'd expect him to attenuate that whatever way he can.
Scintillating10
Registered User
The Kostitsyn pick was much worse than LeBlance because '03 draft very good draft, lot of talent available
Claude Giroux is pretty french for a name and they elected to go with Fischer... stop with the allusions.
1) He would have been punched back
2) He would have been fired
3) It wouldn't have voided the trade
That's one of the things that will always elude me.
Why is it that so many people write Timmons instead of Timmins? Lindstrom instead of Lidstrom?
I'll take a stab at your question. 1) Timmons is a much more common name than Timmins and 2) ditto Lindstrom over Lidstrom.
You don't get do-overs. It was a gamble. To change the subject, I wouldn't have taken Fleury first overall in that same 2003 draft. In hindsight, the Penguins could have taken a skater and drafted another goaltender either later in that draft or the following year. Through dumb luck they were able to draft Malkin in 2004 even though the Caps won the lottery and beat them out on Ovechkin. And in 2005 they got lucky again and were able to pluck Crosby. (I won't even bring up their dumb luck (on top of atrocious play) that enabled the unworthy Penguins to draft Mario Lemieux first more than a decade earlier.
Whitesnake
If you rebuild, they will come.
- Jan 5, 2003
- 89,494
- 36,882
Let just say that we should have had the draft in Montreal in 2006 instead of 2009.....
DAChampion
Registered User
- May 28, 2011
- 29,810
- 20,964
SirClintonPortis
ProudCapitalsTraitor
Let just say that we should have had the draft in Montreal in 2006 instead of 2009.....
Is Hearst, Ontario close enough to deem Giroux a hometown boy?
macavoy
Registered User
Is Hearst, Ontario close enough to deem Giroux a hometown boy?
In Ontario, we consider that whole area, Quebec.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
Pre-Game Talk: Oilers vs. Canucks - time to make Vancouver rainier than usual- Latest: Captain Fantastic
-
-
-
