Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part 10)

[dcyhabs]

I believe McCarron and KK weren't consensus BPA at the time. Correct me if I am wrong, but that is what I remember.

To get back to Caufield, it's so silly that teams continue to make these sorts of mistakes at the draft table. A shot like that and the offensive instincts to use it can't be taught. Players can work on their athleticism, commitment, fitness, defensive game (though a little harder). But those instincts, those are rare.

The fear of size, especially in today's game is so ridiculous.

McCarron was nuts, KK was a reach but maybe not a crazy reach, unlike McCarron there were arguments for the pick.

The NHL still encourages bullying and does not expect small players to survive. Tom Wilson and Wayne Simmonds were taking advantage of that the last day or two. Historically a significant number of small players who were not insanely fast have not been able to play at higher levels. There were always exceptions and there are more now.

The habs have often taken the wrong player from an effective junior line, we'll get to compare Hughes and Caufield.

Caufield looks awesome but he improved a lot in the last two years, speed, play away from the puck... If he'd been drafted third overall and immediately gone to the NHL I doubt it would have helped his development.

 

[sandviper]

Not for KK. They picked for need. They had done the same previously (McCarron for one, or when they went full defencemen for a full draft).

Actually, wasn’t it a bit of both? They picked for both need and BPA. I think going in, a lot of insiders speculated it was Hayton or Kotkaniemi, and this was before the draft. I forget who said it, but the camera was on Bergevin and I think Dorion.

Anyhow, what I’m getting at is they were always going to pick a center, but they went for BPA at the position.

As for Caufield, kinda crazy how he fell to us. I thought he’d be gone top-10 for sure and recall not even watching the draft because I was sure we’d take York.

 

[Sorinth]

My impression was that the habs do try to pick BPA over the past few years, I was just assumed that they just suck at assessing who the best player was.

I tend to agree with this, though I don't think they suck as much as some.

They didn't pick McCarron/De La Rose/Poehling because they thought they were getting 3rd/4th liners. They picked them because they saw offensive potential in them, if they saw 50-60 point potential from McCarron it's hard to say they didn't draft who they thought was the BPA. It's the same with JDLR, look at his draft profile and some thought he had the offence to be a top-6 guy, and some thought the skillset just wasn't there. So it's pretty clear that the Habs scouts sided with those that thought he had top-6 potential and not those that thought he didn't.

 

[First Line]

I tend to agree with this, though I don't think they suck as much as some.

They didn't pick McCarron/De La Rose/Poehling because they thought they were getting 3rd/4th liners. They picked them because they saw offensive potential in them, if they saw 50-60 point potential from McCarron it's hard to say they didn't draft who they thought was the BPA. It's the same with JDLR, look at his draft profile and some thought he had the offence to be a top-6 guy, and some thought the skillset just wasn't there. So it's pretty clear that the Habs scouts sided with those that thought he had top-6 potential and not those that thought he didn't.

McCaron was a need, because we wanted to get bigger. Poehling was projected as a 3rd liner on draft day but that’s fine because of where he was picked.
Still, need first and bpa second is a flawed strategy and I’m amazed the scouting staff goes along with it.
I can’t even remember the last time we drafted a player like Caufield especially in the 1st round.

 

[Sorinth]

McCaron was a need, because we wanted to get bigger. Poehling was projected as a 3rd liner on draft day but that’s fine because of where he was picked.
Still, need first and bpa second is a flawed strategy and I’m amazed the scouting staff goes along with it.
I can’t even remember the last time we drafted a player like Caufield especially in the 1st round.

I can fairly easily find scouting reports that talk about McCaron being potentially a good offensive player. Why is it so hard to imagine that MTL scouts believed in those offensive talents?

Not just a bruising forward, McCarron showed terrific skating and puck skills.

McCarron has elite puck skills for a player of his size and showed both a willingness to distribute and a lack of fear of his shot, which is quite good. His footwork is solid enough and improving.

He has some impressive tools like strong skating ability, balance on his feet and a hard shot off the rush as well as the ability to finish in close

NHL Potential: Top 6 power forward winger
Fantasy Hockey Potential: Offensive: 7/10 Defensive: 4/10

https://thehockeywriters.com/michael-mccarron-the-next-ones-nhl-2013-draft-prospect-profile/

 

[montreal]

One thing that has bothered me about Timmins and perhaps MB as I don't know how this works but my question is why did it take so long to replace Christer Rockstrom in Sweden, if he even is as all we know is that they finally hired a scout directly for Sweden in 2019 in the year we got Norlinder.

But from when he joined us in 2010-2011, to 2017-2018 he was the only scout we had based in Sweden. Now I can understand keeping him around for a few years as the guy had an outstanding record of drafting Swedish players for the wings and did well enough with NYR. If you look at his last years with NYR, he was promoted in '05-'06 to Director of Player Development Europe till he was let go in 2010. In those 5 years he did way better then anything he's done for us to date, as he got Anisimov, Hagelin, Jesper Fast, Horak.

With us the best guy he's got is DLR or Collberg. Now I have said many times that I think they would have had an NHLer in Nygren if not for injuries as the Habs did say they were planning on calling him up when he got the concussion. Now maybe Vejdemo turns into something and there's still Olofsson but seeing Hallander play on the 1st line for Team Sweden in today's exhibition game for the WC's who was picked 2 spots after Olofsson. Seeing Olofsson get demoted to their AHL it certainly doesn't give you a warm fuzzy feeling when you look at the guys track record in drafting Swedes for us.

Now who knows what goes on, is Timmins overriding him or paying too much attention to his picks. I seem to recall a story after the '16 that Rocstrom pushed for the Habs to trade for a 7th round pick to get Henrikson. I'd have to look that up since it's been a few years since but that alone should get you fired. Although maybe it did lead to them finally hiring a scout directly based in Sweden.

 

[DAChampion]

Caulfield was such a good pick at 14th overall.

 

[Doc5]

Caulfield was such a good pick at 14th overall.

Said Flyers fans in an alternative universe

 

[Whitesnake]

With Caufield we went BPA. Period. We went with the BPA at 15th, and we will win. Yes, BPA doesn't always guarantee something. But if you have to lose, lose with that strategy. But we won't lose with the Caufield pick.

 

[dcyhabs]

Timmins has had some great years and some terrible years. Lefebvre and Therrien did not have many great prospects but they did a good job of making the average ones get worse, or at least not better, over time. Hudon was good in his first year, never improved, Leblanc got worse, Tinordi got worse but the league changed around him, too, McCarron had little hope but he got worse until he got a skating coach in his third year, Beaulieu never improved... Sure some of those guys had no hope, but what little there was got stamped on.

A bunch of picks, like McCarron, really looked like they were trying to find something in a draft when it wasn't there. Whoever made the decision to take those picks should be gone.

Timmins may not be a top guy in his position in the league, but he's at least OK. If the habs are going to get rid of him they need to start grooming replacements. Firing people to fire people is why we ended up with Therrien, Cunneyworth, Tremblay, Houle, and a bunch of other mediocre and/or unprepared guys who made the team worse. If they can bring in a guy who will scout in depth, evaluate thoroughly, work to improve processes, look into analytics and then stand his ground on the picks whatever the GM and coaches say then go for it. I don't have confidence that firing Timmins would bring in someone better. Firing him in 2009 or so might have helped, but then the habs had so few good picks in the weak years it might not have.

 

[Whitesnake]

I can fairly easily find scouting reports that talk about McCaron being potentially a good offensive player. Why is it so hard to imagine that MTL scouts believed in those offensive talents?

https://thehockeywriters.com/michael-mccarron-the-next-ones-nhl-2013-draft-prospect-profile/

Strange take....

So based on this link you provided that should show how great he was, we see that most lists didn't have him top 30. A huge guy with SUCH incredible great offensive skills not in a top 30? Really? And great balance? Really? Yeah, I guess against pygmees that were 5'4'' but if the guy NEVER had something, it was great balance. That pick was ONLY needs. And it had NOTHING to do with talent.

And reading at the rest of this link is really laughable. The same link that mentions adequate skating, sees a scout saying he has terrific skating and puck skills??? Elite puck skills??? Hello?

Aaron Vickers whose take you are taking to prove a point works at FC. A FC who had him at 52.

So in reality, no, it's not hard to think that they thought that. Since Timmins came on board, the only great forwards we ended up picking were Pacioretty and Gallagher. Yeah Caufield will be another one but I'm talking about proven. So they can think what they want....but there is NO DOUBT that they bought the size more than they bought the talent.

Finally....I won't have the last word on this....I'll let Timmins have the last word....won't be long...just listen from the start to 0.30 seconds. Tell me what we addressed again....

 

[superstar436]

So they draft based on need on at least 3 occasions (leblanc, tinordi, and mcaron) and it doesn't work, so let's make 4 in KK.

Someone doesn't want to learn !

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

As for Caufield, kinda crazy how he fell to us. I thought he’d be gone top-10 for sure and recall not even watching the draft because I was sure we’d take York.

I watched and I remember getting more excited each time a team passed on him after the 7th or 8th pick. The whole thing kinda put a balm on picking 15th after missing the playoffs by so little.

 

[KevSkillz4]

So they draft based on need on at least 3 occasions (leblanc, tinordi, and mcaron) and it doesn't work, so let's make 4 in KK.

Someone doesn't want to learn !

So you seriously compare KK to Leblanc, Tinordi and McCarron?

KK got 34 points in 79 games at 18 years old, that's pretty impressive. If he put 30 points next year, we can be worried about him. But from now... he got great flashes and he play not that bad for a 20 points player in 51 games. If he put 50 points next year, now we can enjoy and he can become a 70 points two-way C at 22 years old. That would be amazing pick at #3. Just relax.

 

[Sorinth]

Strange take....

So based on this link you provided that should show how great he was, we see that most lists didn't have him top 30. A huge guy with SUCH incredible great offensive skills not in a top 30? Really? And great balance? Really? Yeah, I guess against pygmees that were 5'4'' but if the guy NEVER had something, it was great balance. That pick was ONLY needs. And it had NOTHING to do with talent.

You missed the point entirely. I wasn't trying to show how great a pick he was or how he had incredible offence, I was showing that SOME people did see a player with offensive talent.

Why are we assuming that our scouts weren't amongst those that believed he had offensive talent?

And reading at the rest of this link is really laughable. The same link that mentions adequate skating, sees a scout saying he has terrific skating and puck skills??? Elite puck skills??? Hello?

Aaron Vickers whose take you are taking to prove a point works at FC. A FC who had him at 52.

So in reality, no, it's not hard to think that they thought that. Since Timmins came on board, the only great forwards we ended up picking were Pacioretty and Gallagher. Yeah Caufield will be another one but I'm talking about proven. So they can think what they want....but there is NO DOUBT that they bought the size more than they bought the talent.

Finally....I won't have the last word on this....I'll let Timmins have the last word....won't be long...just listen from the start to 0.30 seconds. Tell me what we addressed again....

And at the 50s mark he says even though he fills a need he's still just a good hockey player. So why assume they drafted for need and not the BPA who just happened to also fill a need?

There's no doubt in my mind that they drafted McCarron because they thought he could become a top-6 power forward.

 

[First Line]

I can fairly easily find scouting reports that talk about McCaron being potentially a good offensive player. Why is it so hard to imagine that MTL scouts believed in those offensive talents?









https://thehockeywriters.com/michael-mccarron-the-next-ones-nhl-2013-draft-prospect-profile/

Interesting stuff. I do remember there was a real need back then to get bigger and that McCaron was somewhat of a reach. Still, it’s conceivable they went for the best guy with size.
It’s too easy to go back and say they got the wrong bpa as he clearly wasn’t and we “stole” Fucale who was supposed to go much higher so I won’t get into that.

 

[superstar436]

So you seriously compare KK to Leblanc, Tinordi and McCarron?

KK got 34 points in 79 games at 18 years old, that's pretty impressive. If he put 30 points next year, we can be worried about him. But from now... he got great flashes and he play not that bad for a 20 points player in 51 games. If he put 50 points next year, now we can enjoy and he can become a 70 points two-way C at 22 years old. That would be amazing pick at #3. Just relax.

Not conparing kk to leblanc and others. I am comparing Kk to Brady you know who ?

 

[Whitesnake]

You missed the point entirely. I wasn't trying to show how great a pick he was or how he had incredible offence, I was showing that SOME people did see a player with offensive talent.

Why are we assuming that our scouts weren't amongst those that believed he had offensive talent?



And at the 50s mark he says even though he fills a need he's still just a good hockey player. So why assume they drafted for need and not the BPA who just happened to also fill a need?

There's no doubt in my mind that they drafted McCarron because they thought he could become a top-6 power forward.

Assume we drafted for needs? Timmins SAID so in the video I added. He didn't say the usual we went with who was higher on our list, he LITERALLY said we went for needs. They thought he had more offensive game? What's more offensnive game? Top 6? Top 9? You still need offense on your 3rd line. You still want your 4th line to contribute so....more offense in comparison to a AHL'er?

What made them think he had offensive skills? HIs last season before he was drafted? Sure..he had some points to the list. But then John Hayden who had about the same number of points while being about the same age went...in the 3rd round. Or Sean Malone with about the same number of points being chosen in the 6th round? Or Hudson Fasching, younger and with the same number of points beinig c hosen in the 4th round. All guys from the very same team.

Timmins has ALWAYS received priases for his picks. Even the worst ones. Everytime a draft happens, we hear from a journalist here and there how they went to see other scouts from other teams and ask them about the Habs picks. Those scouts keep praising Timmins pick. Everytime. Scherbak, Galchy, whatever. Everytime. Except for McCarron. First time ever and I don't remember it happening after that scouts were serioiusly wondering what the Habs were doing.....

 

[Goal Caufield50]

So you seriously compare KK to Leblanc, Tinordi and McCarron?

KK got 34 points in 79 games at 18 years old, that's pretty impressive. If he put 30 points next year, we can be worried about him. But from now... he got great flashes and he play not that bad for a 20 points player in 51 games. If he put 50 points next year, now we can enjoy and he can become a 70 points two-way C at 22 years old. That would be amazing pick at #3. Just relax.

As KK starts on the 4th line left wing tomorrow against the sens

 

[26Mats]

As KK starts on the 4th line left wing tomorrow against the sens

He's the 3c. Not sure why they had Staal linebacking drills ahead of the KK line.

He's at center by the way

 

[Goal Caufield50]

He's the 3c. Not sure why they had Staal linebacking drills ahead of the KK line.

He's at center by the way

Not tomorrow nite and he was not playing centre Monday nite. Please try to stay current.

 

[26Mats]

Not tomorrow nite and he was not playing centre Monday nite. Please try to stay current.

yeah, they reposted the lines in practice today. KK is centering Evans and Lehkonen.

And Monday, KK was wing on the first line. Please try to stay current.

 

[Sorinth]

Assume we drafted for needs? Timmins SAID so in the video I added. He didn't say the usual we went with who was higher on our list, he LITERALLY said we went for needs. They thought he had more offensive game? What's more offensnive game? Top 6? Top 9? You still need offense on your 3rd line. You still want your 4th line to contribute so....more offense in comparison to a AHL'er?

What made them think he had offensive skills? HIs last season before he was drafted? Sure..he had some points to the list. But then John Hayden who had about the same number of points while being about the same age went...in the 3rd round. Or Sean Malone with about the same number of points being chosen in the 6th round? Or Hudson Fasching, younger and with the same number of points beinig c hosen in the 4th round. All guys from the very same team.

Timmins has ALWAYS received priases for his picks. Even the worst ones. Everytime a draft happens, we hear from a journalist here and there how they went to see other scouts from other teams and ask them about the Habs picks. Those scouts keep praising Timmins pick. Everytime. Scherbak, Galchy, whatever. Everytime. Except for McCarron. First time ever and I don't remember it happening after that scouts were serioiusly wondering what the Habs were doing.....

Except he didn't, his exact words were "We addressed a need" which they did, he didn't say they drafted based on need. And like I said if you continue listening the very next question is about BPA vs Need and he clarifies and says they didn't just draft the guy because of need they drafted him because he's a good player.

Are you actually claiming that no one believed he had the potential to be a top-6 PWF even though I showed a draft profile that explicitly listed his potential as a top-6 PWF?

 

[dcyhabs]

So you seriously compare KK to Leblanc, Tinordi and McCarron?

KK got 34 points in 79 games at 18 years old, that's pretty impressive. If he put 30 points next year, we can be worried about him. But from now... he got great flashes and he play not that bad for a 20 points player in 51 games. If he put 50 points next year, now we can enjoy and he can become a 70 points two-way C at 22 years old. That would be amazing pick at #3. Just relax.

I would compare them in that they were all projects, not players that were immediately ready for the NHL. The habs did not work on McCarron's skating, and he didn't get outside help until his third year. It was pathetic, and the organization should fire their development staff. Tinordi was raw, needed some reps, got pushed to fight goons, regressed, and the league got faster, bad timing for the pick, bad development by Lefebvre, who is, fortunately, gone. KK needed AHL time, was put in the NHL immediately to justify reaching for him at 3 OA and because of lack of Cs, eventually went back to the AHL, still working it out, would be a better player on a cheaper contract if he had been sent down first year.

The problem is not so much the picks, there really weren't many big forwards after McCarron in that draft for example. It's that if you are going to pick projects who need to grow and develop you need to nurture them. You don't need to push them to fight no hope goon players, you need to work on their skills. The players aren't comparable in terms of potential (3 OA pick vs low firsts, they should not be) but the difference in coaching and development was also significant, so there is hope for the future. The habs should definitely be setting players up with skating coaches, skills coaches, everything, over the summers, not just workout plans.

The habs are now able to develop players in the AHL, and they don't have obvious gaps in the NHL that force them to bring up whoever they have even if it will trash their development, like say Mete. There is some hope for a change.

 

[dcyhabs]

Except he didn't, his exact words were "We addressed a need" which they did, he didn't say they drafted based on need. And like I said if you continue listening the very next question is about BPA vs Need and he clarifies and says they didn't just draft the guy because of need they drafted him because he's a good player.

Are you actually claiming that no one believed he had the potential to be a top-6 PWF even though I showed a draft profile that explicitly listed his potential as a top-6 PWF?

Right, you can consider need, position value, and other criteria, but if there is a clearly better player you ignore them. Early in the draft when the skills gap can be huge BPA is key. Later in the draft when most players have a minimal chance it makes less difference. Taking KK over consensus picks like Zadina and Tkachuk at 3rd was a bigger risk than taking McCarron as a late first or Tinordi at 22. KK so far is good, but he's being outproduced by the picks following him, but then he's still developing, so we'll have to wait and see. Sure, the habs could have taken Kuznetsov or Theodore in the other drafts but most players following their picks were pretty forgettable. Even Theodore switched organizations a few times before solidifying his position. Not sure we'd be happier if we had gone consensus with Zadina. Hughes was pretty much consensus outside the top 5, but then so was KK.

Going BPA is great, but you can also end up taking Luongo and Dipietro in consecutive drafts, at least you can if you are dumb enough to take a goalie in the first round. Not sure it is so much "always BPA" as "if there is a very clear BPA then you take him even if doing so does not fill a need." Taking low percentage high reward shots after the first 20 picks is not a bad idea, it's just that the habs haven't hit on one yet. David Fischer is not in this category and picking him was an inexcusable complete failure, but that was 15 years ago.