Did Trevor Timmins learn from his mistakes?

[ProspectsFanatic]

Well instead of posting a list of 210 picks, some could just put a list of players they would have taken (among the picks that were drafted later).
But you must assume that the player you did not pick is gone when the next pick available.

For example, you can flip McCarron for Hartman but you can not later pick McCarron at 34 because you must assume he would be gone.
Note that this can only be done after the draft as we don't know the trades before.

And then we can revisit after every draft.

As for me, I will stick with TT's list. I am sure I will be better than most.

Well, I am not sure if I fully understood you.

But, this is what I would have drafted if I had the Montreal picks according to my list:
25. Artturi Lehkonen (L) - SM-Liiga - 5"11 - [55]
34. Nick Sorensen (R) - QMJHL - 6"01 - [45]
36. William Carrier (L) - QMJHL - 6"02 - [57]
55. Pavel Buchnevich (L) - KHL - 6"01 - [75]
71. Eric Roy (D) - WHL - 6"03 - [135]
86. Oliver Bjorkstrand (R) - WHL - 5"11 - [89]
116. Gustav Possler (R) - SElite - 5"11 - [130]
176. Brendan Harms (R) - USHL - 6"00 - Not Drafted
*206. Connor Rankin (L) - WHL - 6"00 - Not Drafted

Yes, I picked a USHL player. I am not saying USHL player aren't good, I am just saying Timmins seems to have slightly overated them in the past.
By the way, I am not saying Fucale, De La Rose and McCaran aren't great pick also, in fact, I ranked them high on my list.
Also, I am just doing this for fun, I know I am not a professional.

 

[jojo]

Thing is, you can't really evaluate TT (or anyone else in his position) on a handful of picks. What we'd really need is his full rankings for the draft. For example, in 2007, when Pittsburgh and Edmonton drafted Esposito (20th) and Riley Nash (21st), did TT think "suckers, I'm taking MaxPac (22nd) and he is better than both of them" or did he think "damn, I wish they'd picked MaxPac instead"? Maybe TT will write his memoirs one day and we'll know...

 

[Price My Man Crush]

After trading Kristo yesterday to the Rangers, you guys should take a look at our 2008 draft. At least, it's not like it was one of the best draft ever!!!!!11

Our 1st round pick was traded for Tanguay, right?

 

[WeThreeKings]

After trading Kristo yesterday to the Rangers, you guys should take a look at our 2008 draft. At least, it's not like it was one of the best draft ever!!!!!11

Our 1st round pick was traded for Tanguay, right?

Yes. Another terrible trade.

 

[Frankc]

Well, I am not sure if I fully understood you.

But, this is what I would have drafted if I had the Montreal picks according to my list:
25. Artturi Lehkonen (L) - SM-Liiga - 5"11 - [55]
34. Nick Sorensen (R) - QMJHL - 6"01 - [45]
36. William Carrier (L) - QMJHL - 6"02 - [57]
55. Pavel Buchnevich (L) - KHL - 6"01 - [75]
71. Eric Roy (D) - WHL - 6"03 - [135]
86. Oliver Bjorkstrand (R) - WHL - 5"11 - [89]
116. Gustav Possler (R) - SElite - 5"11 - [130]
176. Brendan Harms (R) - USHL - 6"00 - Not Drafted
*206. Nikolas Brouillard (D) - QMJHL - 5"10 - Not Drafted

Yes, I picked a USHL player. I am not saying USHL player aren't good, I am just saying Timmins seems to have slightly overated them in the past.
By the way, I am not saying Fucale, De La Rose and McCaran aren't great pick also, in fact, I ranked them high on my list.
Also, I am just doing this for fun, I know I am not a professional.

Just by curiosity, how many of these guys have you seen played ?

 

[Dada]

I like Brent Flahr

 

[montreal]

For the second consecutive year, no college leagues player (NCAA, USHL, BCHL and comparable leagues) drafted in the 3rd to 7th round, after 5 consecutive years of drafting at least one. Coincidence?

In the last 8 drafts, Timmins has picked an American or a player playing in an American junior league, 7 out 8 times. Coincidence?

 

[FloJack]

In the last 8 drafts, Timmins has picked an American or a player playing in an American junior league, 7 out 8 times. Coincidence?

No no, he's learned from his mistakes, not coincidence.

 

[Souffle]

First and foremost, I want to make it clear that I am a big fan of Timmins and I believe he is one of the best chief scouts in the league.
However, I believe he made a slight miss evaluation on prospects playing in college leagues (NCAA, USHL, BCHL and comparable leagues). In fact, he overrated them, particularly in comparison with CHL (LHJMQ-WHL-OHL) prospects. Those missed evaluations made him repeat the same mistakes over and over again.
Here, I am comparing players coming from the CHL and players coming from college leagues that were drafted between round 3 to 7. Comparing the two first rounds was irrelevant, because those players had enough exposure to be evaluated properly, CHL players and USA college players can be compared directly in U17 and U18 tournaments. In fact, we have to give Timmins credits for his selections of college leagues players with top picks, except the bust that was Fischer he was able to get McDonagh, Pacioretty, Kristo and Tinordi.
You will see that with our late round picks, the rate of relative success is convincingly contrasting between CHL players and college leagues players.


2005-2011
NCAA-USHL-BCHL
3rd (79) - Mac Bennett (D)
3rd (86) - Steve Quailer (F)
4th (97) - Josiah Didier (D)
4th (113) - Mark MacMillan (F)
5th (133) - Joe Stejskal (D)
5th (142) - Andrew Conboy (F)
6th (169) - Dustin Walsh (F)
7th (192) - Scott Kishel (D)
7th (198) - Colin Sullivan (D)
7th (199) - Mike Cichy (F)
7th (229) - Philippe Paquet (D)
7th (206) - Patrick Johnson (F)
Maybe Bennett and ...? could play at least a game in the NHL; 1.5/12
Result: 12,5%

CHL:
3rd (65) - Olivier Fortier (F)
3rd (66) - Ryan White (F)
3rd (73) - Yannick Weber (D)
4th (108) - Olivier Archambault (F)
4th (117) - Morgan Ellis (D)
5th (130) - Mathieu Aubin (F)
5th (138) - Darren Dietz (D)
5th (139) - Gabriel Dumont (F)
5th (147) - Brendon Gallagher (F)
6th (190) - Matt D'Agostini (F)
7th (199) - Cameron Cepek (D)
White, Weber, Dumont, D'Agostini and Gallagher have already played in the NHL, and probably at least one between Ellis and Dietz will play in the NHL; 6/11
Result: 54,5%

Many wasted picks... Teams that are active signing graduated players from the NCAA have arguably better success then us with our College/NCAA players.
Also, I just want to add that drafting more European players with our late rounds pick could have also been an interesting possibility instead.
In the 2012 draft, Trevor Timmins seemed to have learned from his mistakes selecting no player from college league with his lower picks. He picked Bozon(3rd), Vail(4th), Hudon(5th) and Nystrom(6th). With Bozon's incredible season and Hudon being able to make team Canada U20 with an other year of eligibility remaining, Timmins' lower picks in the 2012 draft is among his best selections since he has been hired.

Discuss!


* By the way, I already know that it is normal for NCAA players to have slower development and that they are more 7th picks in the NCAA side's . But still... the gap is still considerable.

Well, the point's already been made that the contract rule gives the team some flexibility to let some prospects hothouse in the NCAA longer than it could with CHLers.

But I think the numbers are a bit skewed by adding the 6th and 7th rounders. The percentage of those picks becoming anything is pretty close to 0. In the 2005-2011 tranch, you have 6 of those NCAA type picks versus only 2 CHL. If you just eliminate those picks altogether, then I'm not so sure that the case is as strong that drafting NCAA types is a mistake.

Going by your 1.5 NCAA assessment, the ratio is actually 1.5 out of 6 -- which is 25%. I won't argue about Macmillan or Quailer, but if we round up the .5 number (how can you have half of a hockey player that might or might not play / has or has not played in the NHL?), then the percentage is 33%. Not bad. Not bad at all.

With the CHLers, the ratio is 5 out of 9. That's an outstanding number for rounds 3 to 5. I'm not sure that's an indication of NCAA types versus CHLers or an indication of good drafting. In other words, I'm not convinced by these numbers that, in principle, drafting NCAA types in rounds 3 to 5 is inherently worse than drafting CHLers. I incline to the view that it just indicates that Timmins and friends have had very good success with CHLers in those rounds. So, I would explore the argument that it says more about those specific drafts than it does about taking NCAA types versus CHLers in general in those rounds.

Anyway, we'll see whether there is a trend going forward. Another potentially interesting breakdown would be with the Europeans. The Habs were pretty weak for a while after A. Savard left, but there may be a trend of them looking more to Sweden in particular.

Interesting thread. Thanks for putting together the numbers.

 

[Grant McCagg]

Just by curiosity, how many of these guys have you seen played ?

Even more curiously, why does he have a list? Those picks would have been horrendous. Three of his top four picks are risky, and the other (Sorenson) has limited offensive upside. I like Lehkonen, but no way you risk your first round pick on him. Habs had three second rounders so he was worth a flyer with the third one. Carrier has extremely well documented character issues and health concerns....

As for Buch....... helluva lot easier for someone to say they'd pick Buchnevich than to actually do it. Not one NHL teams was willing to waste a second rounder on a flaky Russian..that's 100+ senior scouts and 30 head scouts who thought differently than you...but hey...it's easy to sit back and say "I'd have taken Buchnevich."

If by the off chance he actually has a lengthy, successful NHL career..the Habs prospect expert will always be able to come back on here and say "I told you so!"...so what's the risk for him? Buchnevish flops and you can always blame it on the NHL team not giving him a proper chance...and how the lure of playing in the KHL was too much. Easy.

 

[Souffle]

There's no way. Wasn't PG and A GM with BG? Weren't they the ones that wanted AK instead. He was the Director of Professional Scouting then so idk if he has a say in amateur scouting.

When he took over as GM in 2010. Those picks (2010, 2011) were Tinordi, Beaulieu, I think Kristo as well and i'm missing some others. TT is the man. Anyone else who says otherwise is clearly delusional.

As for 2003-2010, BG probably had more of a push for CP31 in 2005, AK46 most likely in 2003 and in 2006 BG probably pushed for a defenseman who wasn't the BPA. 2007 was gold in McD, Patches, and Subban in the 2nd round which, IMO i think was all TT probably after telling Gainey "we did it your way before, let me have at it now, i'll get you some great talent." Lo behold, he has a top 4 defenseman, a top 6 power forward, and a top 5 NHL defenseman from those first 2 rounds.

TT FOR GM!

This is pretty conjectural, dude. Going by internet legend (it's not worth much, but I think it's still more reliable than your splendid speculation), the 2003 draft was largely A. Savard's legacy -- Kostitysn and Urqhart in particular.

Likewise, so the internet has informed me over the years, in 2005 Timmins presented Gainey with the choice between a goalie (Price) and a defenceman (Staal) at 5th overall. Gainey said, take the goalie.

The Fischer pick has already been covered in this thread. I had actually thought that the pick was attributable to Vaughn Karpan, the Minnesota scout who pushed hard when he was with Phoenix for Blake Wheeler at 5th overall, but it looks like I got mixed up on that one.

Anyway, I'm not sure why you pass off a statement of fact as an IMO. It either did or didn't happen that way, and your opinion on whether it did or did not is irrelevant. I guess what you mean to say is IMB (belief, however warranted) or IMF (fantasy -- why not, it's the internet, after all). In that case, fair enough, keep speculating.

 

[ProspectsFanatic]

Well, the point's already been made that the contract rule gives the team some flexibility to let some prospects hothouse in the NCAA longer than it could with CHLers.

But I think the numbers are a bit skewed by adding the 6th and 7th rounders. The percentage of those picks becoming anything is pretty close to 0. In the 2005-2011 tranch, you have 6 of those NCAA type picks versus only 2 CHL. If you just eliminate those picks altogether, then I'm not so sure that the case is as strong that drafting NCAA types is a mistake.

Going by your 1.5 NCAA assessment, the ratio is actually 1.5 out of 6 -- which is 25%. I won't argue about Macmillan or Quailer, but if we round up the .5 number (how can you have half of a hockey player that might or might not play / has or has not played in the NHL?), then the percentage is 33%. Not bad. Not bad at all.

With the CHLers, the ratio is 5 out of 9. That's an outstanding number for rounds 3 to 5. I'm not sure that's an indication of NCAA types versus CHLers or an indication of good drafting. In other words, I'm not convinced by these numbers that, in principle, drafting NCAA types in rounds 3 to 5 is inherently worse than drafting CHLers. I incline to the view that it just indicates that Timmins and friends have had very good success with CHLers in those rounds. So, I would explore the argument that it says more about those specific drafts than it does about taking NCAA types versus CHLers in general in those rounds.

Anyway, we'll see whether there is a trend going forward. Another potentially interesting breakdown would be with the Europeans. The Habs were pretty weak for a while after A. Savard left, but there may be a trend of them looking more to Sweden in particular.

Interesting thread. Thanks for putting together the numbers.

Thank you for bringing your view on that topic. Happy to see that some are able to give their point of view, not just criticism.

Even more curiously, why does he have a list? Those picks would have been horrendous. Three of his top four picks are risky, and the other (Sorenson) has limited offensive upside. I like Lehkonen, but no way you risk your first round pick on him. Habs had three second rounders so he was worth a flyer with the third one. Carrier has extremely well documented character issues and health concerns....

As for Buch....... helluva lot easier for someone to say they'd pick Buchnevich than to actually do it. Not one NHL teams was willing to waste a second rounder on a flaky Russian..that's 100+ senior scouts and 30 head scouts who thought differently than you...but hey...it's easy to sit back and say "I'd have taken Buchnevich."

If by the off chance he actually has a lengthy, successful NHL career..the Habs prospect expert will always be able to come back on here and say "I told you so!"...so what's the risk for him? Buchnevish flops and you can always blame it on the NHL team not giving him a proper chance...and how the lure of playing in the KHL was too much. Easy.

Alright, alright, you have to right to have your opinion. However, I have feeling that whoever I would have chosen, you would have find a way to tell me how I was wrong..
You who you would have rather pick? We could compare in 5 years and find who did best..?
And by the way, I'm confuse.. wasn't it you that was criticism me that I was acting like an expert?

 

[29dryden29]

Roll out the excuses, at no point will Timmins ever be blamed for anything. I am sure if he ever screws up he will have had vertigo at some point so he will have that covered too.

This right here. I have not been a fan of his early round picks they have been pretty bad.

 

[MonkeyBusiness]

Well, I am not sure if I fully understood you.

But, this is what I would have drafted if I had the Montreal picks according to my list:
25. Artturi Lehkonen (L) - SM-Liiga - 5"11 - [55]
34. Nick Sorensen (R) - QMJHL - 6"01 - [45]
36. William Carrier (L) - QMJHL - 6"02 - [57]
55. Pavel Buchnevich (L) - KHL - 6"01 - [75]
71. Eric Roy (D) - WHL - 6"03 - [135]
86. Oliver Bjorkstrand (R) - WHL - 5"11 - [89]
116. Gustav Possler (R) - SElite - 5"11 - [130]
176. Brendan Harms (R) - USHL - 6"00 - Not Drafted
*206. Nikolas Brouillard (D) - QMJHL - 5"10 - Not Drafted

Yes, I picked a USHL player. I am not saying USHL player aren't good, I am just saying Timmins seems to have slightly overated them in the past.
By the way, I am not saying Fucale, De La Rose and McCaran aren't great pick also, in fact, I ranked them high on my list.
Also, I am just doing this for fun, I know I am not a professional.

3 reaches with the first 3 picks, you could consider McCarron a reach but the other 2 definitely weren't. Plus in this type of draft you don't take Lehkonen at 25, you take the chance to get him at 55. Exactly what the habs did, they took the chance to get him there and it paid off. Plus I wouldn't actually consider McCarron a reach, teams are always looking for big men who skate well, are gritty and have top 6 potential.

 

[calder candidate]

Our biggest issue isn't drafting, MTL draft pick have the most game played in the NHL since TT took over (while never having great position we also traded a lot of 2nd round pick. The issue is the these guy aren't playing for MTL... there as been terrible asset management trading pick for rental, not trading UFA that will test the market at the deadline... Trading await problem players without getting full value or squeezing everything you can for the other team.

Even do I'm not very excited about this year draft as a was with other years in the past, I feel pick to fill need and more than with BPA, also reach on a few picks...

25. Klimchuk (Now knowing that he would be availble in the second round I would of take Dano)
34. De La Rose
36. Dauphin or Bailey
55. Arnesson or Desrosiers (Being that furcale wasn't taken at 36 he should be available) or Lehkonen
71. Buchnevich or Duclair or Lodge or Hogberg
86. Slepyshev or Subban
116. Reway or Fasching or Bergvik
176. Rafikov or Gregoire