Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part 7)

[Adam Michaels]

 

[DAChampion]

That's a nice statement, but it's plausible that it's a PR statement that he would trot out regardless of the underlying situation.

It's probably also better for the player who gets drafted. From a sports psychology standpoint, not that I'm an expert but I'm guessing, it's probably ideal for the management to say that they picked the best player available.

 

[Le Barron de HF]

That's a nice statement, but it's plausible that it's a PR statement that he would trot out regardless of the underlying situation.

It's probably also better for the player who gets drafted. From a sports psychology standpoint, not that I'm an expert but I'm guessing, it's probably ideal for the management to say that they picked the best player available.

Yep, given the circumstances it's better to keep your cards close to your chest since you don't want to give any advantage to other organizations (say you're talking about trading down because you have X guy in mind, you lose your leverage).

 

[The Great Weal]

In other words, this team is so bad at every position that we have way too many holes to fill to only focus on one. It's absolutely ridiculous that we are drafting by need anyways. I'm also going to be livid if we take a goalie with a top 10 pick.

 

[Scriptor]

In other words, this team is so bad at every position that we have way too many holes to fill to only focus on one. It's absolutely ridiculous that we are drafting by need anyways. I'm also going to be livid if we take a goalie with a top 10 pick.

You and I! I think I'd hire a Turkish death squad to take care of Bergevin at that point.

 

[RandR]

This seems to confirm that the Habs chose their #1 picks in the past 2 years according to need. Looking further back (for example, when they wanted more size) it looks like under Bergevin and Timmins they've been favouring needs over BPA all along, even in the first round. No wonder the Habs have underperformed in the 1st round under them. At the top of the draft I believe teams should and generally do draft BPA. Not following that conventional wisdom partially explains why the Habs have underperformed in their 1st round selections under them.

Let's hope this means they will finally pick BPA in the 1st round this year.

 

[The Great Weal]

This seems to confirm that the Habs chose their #1 picks in the past 2 years according to need. Looking further back (for example, when they wanted more size) it looks like under Bergevin and Timmins they've been favouring needs over BPA all along, even in the first round. No wonder the Habs have underperformed in the 1st round under them. At the top of the draft I believe teams should and generally do draft BPA. Not following that conventional wisdom partially explains why the Habs have underperformed in their 1st round selections under them.

Let's hope this means they will finally pick BPA in the 1st round this year.

Still haven't learned their lesson of drafting by need since the Tinordi pick. It's incredibly concerning. It's also not just the 1st round. We heavily favour drafting by need from rounds 2-7 too. Look at all the D we drafted last year and all the centers the year before.

 

[RandR]

Still haven't learned their lesson of drafting by need since the Tinordi pick. It's incredibly concerning. It's also not just the 1st round. We heavily favour drafting by need from rounds 2-7 too. Look at all the D we drafted last year and all the centers the year before.

I figure once you get past the first round or so, there is so little consensus as to BPA at any one pick then at some point it makes sense to address needs too.

However you make a good point... Arguably they have only 2 1st line players on the whole team (Price, drafted earlier as a BPA even though they were strong in goal at the time, and Weber, who of course they traded for), and not a single 1st line forward. On the ice, the most glaring reason why the Canadiens are a mediocre team at best is that they arguably lack a 1st line forward, of any size, any forward position, any style of play.

 

[WeThreeKings]

Goalie comment is gonna trigger so many people.

 

[peate]

Did they fire him?

 

[Chili]

One top six forward so far from the last 12 drafts.

 

[Whitesnake]

True that Habs don't have defining need....they have needs EVERYWHERE. Yet again, for the millionth time, it's so stupid to draft by needs. We most definately wouldn't need another midget up front and yet...Rossi if we pick past the 5th pick WILL be the best forward of the draft. But we don'T pick him because we are too small? Really? Just insane thinking. If Rossi happens to be better than Caufield....what will people say? Who cares about all the otheres midgets we have...TRADE THEM ALL! Including Gallagher if you have too. Especially if in the end, both Caufield and Ross are superior. Or trade Caufield then while he has great value.

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

True that Habs don't have defining need....they have needs EVERYWHERE. Yet again, for the millionth time, it's so stupid to draft by needs. We most definately wouldn't need another midget up front and yet...Rossi if we pick past the 5th pick WILL be the best forward of the draft. But we don'T pick him because we are too small? Really? Just insane thinking. If Rossi happens to be better than Caufield....what will people say? Who cares about all the otheres midgets we have...TRADE THEM ALL! Including Gallagher if you have too. Especially if in the end, both Caufield and Ross are superior. Or trade Caufield then while he has great value.

There is no absolute way to determine BPA however. It is invariably subjective. They may have 8-10 parameters that they try to quantify as best they can (again many of those rather subjectively).

So really, what harm is there in considering one more (a 9th or 11th, as the case may be), which makes the weighted sum also account for organizational need? The problem, I think, is when they do it to the exclusion of all else, or with an outsized weight attributed to need over the other parameters. Exhibit A: At the risk of sounding like a broken record, drafting yet another left-handed defenseman, having just taken two, when an offensive talent Dorofeyev is sitting there at 77. That's just obstinacy, not just a considerable weight given to need.

Another parameter still is the strength of the draft at a given position, which has nothing to do with the player himself, or organizational need, but rather how easily the team can find a comparable substitute, especially in the same draft. Once again, what we mean by BPA becomes fluid, and can imbed another parameter that models comparative rarity of that resource over competing options at the same position.

 

[Hins77]

Thats easy to tell : « draft by need ». Obviously last year it was LD. But. Pretty sure if a very valuable guy was available when Timmins was speaking. Hes gonna select him. I mean. What he is the difference between a projection about a futur top 6 winger or a top 4 LD.? You are gonna select the guy you will need. Timmins show it when cam York was selected by Philadelphia. There was no reason to take a LD. But he did it the rest of the draft.

 

[Habs Icing]

That statement scares the dickens out of me. For a number of reasons.

1) Timmins is starting to sound like MB.
2) He claims they don't have a defining need. A team that will be picking 7th in the draft doesn't have a need. Okay, MR Smarty Pants who are your future top two pairing d-men? Aside from Caufield who are your future goal-scoring wingers? Hey dumb-dumb, how many power forwards do you have in your organization?
3) Why the puck does he mention goaltenders?

I'm just hoping he isn't as stupid as that tweet made him sound and he's just keeping his cards close to his vest because that has to be one of the stupidest comments to ever come out of Habs' management.

 

[Habs Icing]

Yep, given the circumstances it's better to keep your cards close to your chest since you don't want to give any advantage to other organizations (say you're talking about trading down because you have X guy in mind, you lose your leverage).

He could have said we have defining needs in many many areas and leave it at that. It's not like other organizations don't know what the Habs are missing. Actually wasn't it you who posted a survey of NHL scouts asking them which team has the worst scouting and the Habs were voted near the top? That tells me NHL people know how terrible Timmins's selections have been. He doesn't need to play spy to throw them off the scent.

You and I! I think I'd hire a Turkish death squad to take care of Bergevin at that point.

Why Bergevin? Timmins made that asinine comment.

This seems to confirm that the Habs chose their #1 picks in the past 2 years according to need. Looking further back (for example, when they wanted more size) it looks like under Bergevin and Timmins they've been favouring needs over BPA all along, even in the first round. No wonder the Habs have underperformed in the 1st round under them. At the top of the draft I believe teams should and generally do draft BPA. Not following that conventional wisdom partially explains why the Habs have underperformed in their 1st round selections under them.

Let's hope this means they will finally pick BPA in the 1st round this year.

Naw, they have no needs at this draft. They're gonna trade this year's picks for picks in 2040.

 

[DAChampion]

You guys are over-analyzing a PR statement.

 

[SOLR]

That statement scares the dickens out of me. For a number of reasons.

1) Timmins is starting to sound like MB.
2) He claims they don't have a defining need. A team that will be picking 7th in the draft doesn't have a need. Okay, MR Smarty Pants who are your future top two pairing d-men? Aside from Caufield who are your future goal-scoring wingers? Hey dumb-dumb, how many power forwards do you have in your organization?
3) Why the puck does he mention goaltenders?

I'm just hoping he isn't as stupid as that tweet made him sound and he's just keeping his cards close to his vest because that has to be one of the stupidest comments to ever come out of Habs' management.

Maybe because they know that if Price can't get them to the playoff next year he has to or wants to go.

 

[BLONG7]

Dos this statement from TT explain why the Habs have struggled at the draft now for years? Talking about needs instead of BPA doesn't make alot of sense to me...

 

[SOLR]

Dos this statement from TT explain why the Habs have struggled at the draft now for years? Talking about needs instead of BPA doesn't make alot of sense to me...

Or maybe that's Timmins saying "FINALLY I CAN DRAFT BPA THIS YEAR, FREE ME FROM BERGEVIN! lol"

 

[Habs Icing]

Maybe because they know that if Price can't get them to the playoff next year he has to or wants to go.

A) We just went through more than a decade proving that a superstar goalie gets you nowhere in the new NHL; whereas we've seen a good goalie with superstars on the team wins

B) With Primeau in the pipeline how about we forget drafting a goalie in the top 10 and draft either a stud forward or d-man. You need more prospects in the forward and d-men positions than you need in the goalie spot. We got an excellent prospect in goal. We may have a stud d-man in Romanov and maybe we have two stud forwards in KK and Caufield. (I have serious doubts about KK but I'm willing to put my opinion aside.) How about he shores up the depth chart when it comes to 1st pair d-men and top 6 forwards before he talks about starting goalies.

C) Stop picking with needs in mind. BPA - especially in the first round.

 

[SOLR]

A) We just went through more than a decade proving that a superstar goalie gets you nowhere in the new NHL; whereas we've seen a good goalie with superstars on the team wins

These are independent events, you need to go revise your logic.

Conditional Probability and Independence

The fact that we had price didn't stop us in any way from getting other superstars.

 

[Habs Icing]

Dos this statement from TT explain why the Habs have struggled at the draft now for years?

I think so.

 

[Habs Icing]

These are independent events, you need to go revise your logic.

Conditional Probability and Independence

The fact that we had price didn't stop us in any way from getting other superstars.

They are independent events only because you say they are. Using a top 10 pick on a goalie is a losing strategy. Goalies take the longest to mature and grow into their positions - even longer than d-men. They're a bigger crap shoot than any other positions. Judging goalie prospects is next to impossible.

Quick was picked in the 3rd round of the same draft that Price was picked. LA used their 1st round pick to get Kopitar.

2019 Binnington wins the Cup was selected in the 3rd round
2018 Caps win the cup Holtby was selected in the 4th round
2017 Pens win the cup Murray was picked in the 3rd round
2016 see 2017
2015 Hawks win the cup Crawford was selected in the 2nd round
2014 LA wins see Quick above
2013 Hawks win see Crawford above
2012 LA wins see Quick above
2011 Bruins win Rask was selected 21st........yay your logic wins out
2010 Hawks win Niemi was never drafted

You want me to go on?

 

[BLONG7]

These are independent events, you need to go revise your logic.

Conditional Probability and Independence

The fact that we had price didn't stop us in any way from getting other superstars.

Having the wrong GM seems to have hurt us, not having Price. Selecting a star, is on the GM and his scouting team.
That said, MB leaning on Price the way he has is a seriously flawed game plan. It has NOT worked. Something has to give.