Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part 10)

[Sorinth]

Athleticism matters (speed, power, acceleration, etc) but size alone is worth f*** all

Any skill alone is worth f-all. Speed alone gives you Rico Fata, skill alone gives you Corey Locke, etc...

 

[Whitesnake]

My guess here, but I think bloodlines were important.

Anyone who remembers Mark Tinordi, he was a nasty piece of business.

If bloodlines would be important....we would have drafted Brady Tka...ah forget it....

 

[Sorinth]

Yes? Or Marchand based on pure skills? MUCH better pick AT THE TIME than Lucic. Yet again....it would have been a pick based on talent. And we would have been wrong by choosing Maxwell in the end. AGain, I prefer being wrong with that strategy.

And if I go with your logic, going for Maxwell was surely with the thinking that he'd be a great player with skills with maybe a 2nd line upside.

Marchand wasn't really considered a high skill guy back then though.

 

[Chili]

If bloodlines would be important....we would have drafted Brady Tka...ah forget it....

With all the trouble they have had drafting centres, which predates Timmins and includes the team's entire draft history, they were going to take the big centre there. I would have done the same, even knowing that Tkachuk was close to a sure thing.

 

[yianik]

in hindsight yes but clearly they thought they were getting an answer to Chara, which in it's own right shows poor thinking/approach as you shouldn't go for need. They also weren't able to see that the league was changing and that those big physical stay at home types were falling out of favor.

I've said that at worst this team should have been able to turn Tinordi into a 7th D, but if handled better he could have been a solid 5th or 6th, not want you want even for a late 1st but trading up for that is a no no. That said if he was able to turn into the next Chara you hit it out of the park at 22nd OA.

Guys like Chara are 80% dumb luck. They likely thought they were picking a guy who might be a number 4 if the stars aligned. They threw a dart at no.56, and this guy just had exponential development. You can't chase guys like this. I mean we even traded up for Tinordi. If they have Chara potential, then they are a top 3 or 5 pick.

Saying well here is this big mean guy who can skate, anything is possible he might turn into Chara is stupid and you can't draft like that. You draft by saying okay here is a kid who is a bit shorter, needs work defensively, but has great skating, shot and everything else you need to be a top 6 forward , so let's take him.

 

[MD thaivuN]

Any skill alone is worth f-all. Speed alone gives you Rico Fata, skill alone gives you Corey Locke, etc...

sure, but size provides the least singular value of anything you should consider in a prospect.

you should be evaluating a prospect based on the overall combination of skill, smarts, and athleticism. being bigger doesn't automatically make you more athletic or even better.

 

[Sorinth]

sure, but size provides the least singular value of anything you should consider in a prospect.

you should be evaluating a prospect based on the overall combination of skill, smarts, and athleticism. being bigger doesn't automatically make you more athletic or even better.

I don't disagree, but what makes you think they didn't think a given prospect had an overall combination of skills, smarts, athleticism?

 

[coolasprICE]

If we repeat it long enough we start to believe it.

Great players will shine irregardless of who their coach is.

If a coach does not give them ice time or quality linemates, then a great player will make it blatantly obvious that they deserve more ice time and better linemates.

The only thing that holds great players back are NOT having other complimentary great players to play along with.

Galchenyuk is useless and always be useless, because he is not a great player. He is a low IQ player that can't skate.

Stop projecting the same fate on KK.

 

[WinterLion]

We expect every prospect to become Connor McDavid... what could go wrong?

 

[dinodebino]

If we repeat it long enough we start to believe it.

Great players will shine irregardless of who their coach is.

If a coach does not give them ice time or quality linemates, then a great player will make it blatantly obvious that they deserve more ice time and better linemates.

The only thing that holds great players back are NOT having other complimentary great players to play along with.

Galchenyuk is useless and always be useless, because he is not a great player. He is a low IQ player that can't skate.

Stop projecting the same fate on KK.

Hey! Nice seeing you back in this hood!

 

[Habs]

We expect every prospect to become Connor McDavid... what could go wrong?

No we just expect them to get the BPA in the draft when that rare top 3 pick event happens. And if you can't get it right, take a hike , nobody cares about previous picks, can't live off the glory forever.

 

[Andrei79]

Still trying to find any semblance of substance in your post. The second to last paragraph was a truly brutal read though.

There's also a development thread by the way. And a KK thread.

 

[coolasprICE]

No we just expect them to get the BPA in the draft when that rare top 3 pick event happens. And if you can't get it right, take a hike , nobody cares about previous picks, can't live off the glory forever.

Not a coaching issue.

 

[coolasprICE]

Still trying to find any semblance of substance in your post. The second to last paragraph was a truly brutal read though.

There's also a development thread by the way. And a KK thread.

This is a coaching is not as influential as many think thread. Thanks for contributing.

 

[JoelWarlord]

This argument that good players will shine no matter what the situation is obviously nonsense when looked in any other context than hockey. You wouldn't stick a 16 year old in med school because they did well in grade 11 biology class so they're just a great student that will shine no matter what. You don't walk into the gym for the first time with a goal of benching 300 pounds and start at 290. Hockey is not some unique special skill, humans learn anything most efficiently when put in a position to succeed and facing challenges that are slightly to moderately beyond their skill level. Not when they have no consistency in their environment which means no way to consistently build upon successes.

Yes, the absolute most special talents will develop no matter what. It is impossible for a coach to ruin McDavid, but most players are not McDavid. Even Ovechkin had a a big dip in his scoring when they brought in Oates and tried to turn him into this two way checking forward. If the best goal scorer of all time can struggle when he's not put in a position to succeed I'm not sure why it's so crazy to suggest that Alex Galchenyuk or Jesperi Kotkaniemi are struggling in part due to a completely inconsistent and confidence ruining development environment.

The other piece of evidence that's ignored here is that these players all peaked as rookies and got progressively worse as the team "developed" them. The OHL prepared Galchenyuk and Mete for the NHL, the SHL prepared Lehkonen, and Liiga prepared Kotkaniemi, and then the Habs made them progressively worse NHL players every year they spent here.

 

[dinodebino]

Tough crowd! (Rodney Dangerfield face)

 

[BigDaddyLurch]

...so for most of the year, when Kotkaniemi was playing well and deserved more stability and more playing time and the coach just didn't do it cuz "we need to get Phil going" or "we need to get Nick going" or "we need to play Staalsy cuz he used to be a great player", who's fault is that??...bad premise for debate is bad...

 

[coolasprICE]

This argument that good players will shine no matter what the situation is obviously nonsense when looked in any other context than hockey. You wouldn't stick a 16 year old in med school because they did well in grade 11 biology class so they're just a great student that will shine no matter what. You don't walk into the gym for the first time with a goal of benching 300 pounds and start at 290. Hockey is not some unique special skill, humans learn anything most efficiently when put in a position to succeed and facing challenges that are slightly to moderately beyond their skill level. Not when they have no consistency in their environment which means no way to consistently build upon successes.

Yes, the absolute most special talents will develop no matter what. It is impossible for a coach to ruin McDavid, but most players are not McDavid. Even Ovechkin had a a big dip in his scoring when they brought in Oates and tried to turn him into this two way checking forward. If the best goal scorer of all time can struggle when he's not put in a position to succeed I'm not sure why it's so crazy to suggest that Alex Galchenyuk or Jesperi Kotkaniemi are struggling in part due to a completely inconsistent and confidence ruining development environment.

The other piece of evidence that's ignored here is that these players all peaked as rookies and got progressively worse as the team "developed" them. The OHL prepared Galchenyuk and Mete for the NHL, the SHL prepared Lehkonen, and Liiga prepared Kotkaniemi, and then the Habs made them progressively worse NHL players every year they spent here.

And, these players were scarred forever even after being traded before or during their prime?

The reason why players do not excel in Montreal is because we are not giving them good players to excel with.

Caulfield will excel if he's playing with Suzuki.
She won't if he's playing with someone like Staal.

The more talented young players we bring in the more they will be able to grow with each other.

Your comparison about going to the gym and lifting 300 lb is nonsense when you consider the thousands of hours these players are playing competitive hockey.

Yes the NHL is faster but it is still the same game that they grew up playing and does not belong in a comparison of a skinny kid walking into the gym for the first time

 

[BigDaddyLurch]

Tough crowd! (Rodney Dangerfield face)

 

[coolasprICE]

I guarantee you that Suzuki and Caufield will form a great line and compliment and grow their game... Why? Because they are great players in any coach that will be in charge of the Canadians will be putting them both together.

The marginal influences of a great coach versus a bad coach isn't going to change how marginal prospects end-up. And they won't really affect how much a great player ends up developing either.

 

[Mrb1p]

And, these players were scarred forever even after being traded before or during their prime?

The reason why players do not excel in Montreal is because we are not giving them good players to excel with.

Caulfield will excel if he's playing with Suzuki.
She won't if he's playing with someone like Staal.

The more talented young players we bring in the more they will be able to grow with each other.

Your comparison about going to the gym and lifting 300 lb is nonsense when you consider the thousands of hours these players are playing competitive hockey.

Yes the NHL is faster but it is still the same game that they grew up playing and does not belong in a comparison of a skinny kid walking into the gym for the first time

Ironic

 

[MD thaivuN]

I don't disagree, but what makes you think they didn't think a given prospect had an overall combination of skills, smarts, athleticism?

I'm pretty sure this team, and even most teams, don't evaluate based on just these. They also have more other criteria (size, bloodline, character, grit, etc). You can easily overcomplicate or overthink the evaluation process, especially if you overvalue some other criteria. That also makes BPA in the NHL a myth since most teams end up picking who they like.

You don't end up picking McCarron, Tinordi, Crisp where they went because you think they're the best prospects available, but because you really liked them more than others.

 

[habmercy]

The coach can offer opportunity and advice but the player is the performer and gets to decide if there is anencore

 

[BigDaddyLurch]

The coach can offer opportunity and advice but the player is the performer and gets to decide if there is anencore

Coach also offers something a player can't control...ice time...and if the coach doesn't offer them even when the player shows that they deserve them, the coach is hindering the player and their development...bad premise for debate is still bad...

 

[Sorinth]

I'm pretty sure this team, and even most teams, don't evaluate based on just these. They also have more other criteria (size, bloodline, character, grit, etc). You can easily overcomplicate or overthink the evaluation process, especially if you overvalue some other criteria. That also makes BPA in the NHL a myth since most teams end up picking who they like.

You don't end up picking McCarron, Tinordi, Crisp where they went because you think they're the best prospects available, but because you really liked them more than others.

They liked them more then others because they thought they were the better prospect.