Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part 8)

[JeffreyLFC]

But they were not deep drafts though. Weird to compare to two other cherry picked draft years. 17-19 is more like 05-07 in terms of draft power. We will see how it turns out but I bet you it's better than what you think at the moment. Our latest group is very solid.

I agree with what Timmins said. It's in line with what I have been saying for a few years now. You can have your own opinion

I disagree with 2012 was an amazing draft for defenseman and goaltender. You could have drafted a contender defensive squad with pick outside the first round.

2013 was weird because the 3rd round look better than the 2nd round. There was not as much depth but it was not that bad.

 

[Habs Halifax]

I disagree with 2012 was an amazing draft for defenseman and goaltender. You could have drafted a contender defensive squad with pick outside the first round.

2013 was weird because the 3rd round look better than the 2nd round. There was not as much depth but it was not that bad.

Best from the 2012 draft in the 2nd round was who? Tierney?

Best from the 2013 draft in the 2nd round was who? Lehkonen or Bertuzzi?

 

[JeffreyLFC]

Best from the 2012 draft in the 2nd round was who? Tierney?

Best from the 2013 draft in the 2nd round was who? Lehkonen or Bertuzzi?

I was not talking about the 2nd round. I said outside the first round. Look at the 3rd round, it was loaded with defenseman.

 

[ahmedou]

Canadiens' Timmins on how draft prep has been impacted by COVID-19 - Sportsnet.ca

 

[Habs Halifax]

I was not talking about the 2nd round. I said outside the first round. Look at the 3rd round, it was loaded with defenseman.

Loaded with defenseman? Who? Ghost, Parayko, Lindell, Pelech, Grzelchk? Why would we draft another goalie when we took the BPA in Fucale already?

Sorry, I don't considering using the 12 and 13 drafts and only those drafts as a good evaluation in terms of probability of hitting with above average draft power. Circumstance plays a huge factor and this is what Timmins was talking about. No team can match us in terms of how many world junior u20 talent we drafted. No guarantees they reach potential but I rather have what we have than not have it.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

Loaded with defenseman? Who? Ghost, Parayko, Lindell, Pelech?

Sorry, I don't considering using the 12 and 13 drafts and only those drafts as a good evaluation in terms of probability of hitting with above average draft power.

Ghost, Parayko, Lindell, Slavin, Miller, Hutton, Severson, Gustafsson.

I mean those are solid defenseman all outside the 1st round.

Not to mention the goaltender: Andersen, Murray, Hellebuyck, Ullmark.

There was good player to be taken and we got nothing!

 

[Habs Halifax]

Ghost, Parayko, Lindell, Slavin, Miller, Hutton, Severson, Gustafsson.

I mean those are solid defenseman all outside the 1st round.

Not to mention the goaltender: Andersen, Murray, Hellebuyck, Ullmark.

There was good player to be taken and we got nothing!

Conversation started as multiple 2nd round picks and circumstance of how to hit with good draft power depending on the draft year. Now you are stretching it to 3rd and 4th rounds and just showing hits. I'm not a fan of that kind of evaluation. You can hold that against every single team

Timmins has his good and bad years for sure. But I agree with what he said in terms of extra darts to use and go after different types of talent. I've done my own homework on that and his comments fall in line with the stats I complied. Ylonen/Romanov in the early 2nd rounds are a good example of how you can use draft power. Imagine not having the extra 2nd and no Romanov?

12 and 13 were not deep drafts. All you are pointing out is who got lucky.. that happens almost every year but has nothing to do with how deep the draft is and how it compares to the averages

 

[JeffreyLFC]

12 and 13 were not deep drafts. All you are pointing out is who got lucky.. that happens almost every year but has nothing to do with how deep the draft is and how it compares to the averages

I do not get your point. Draft Depth stretch well outside the 2nd round..

Also if you claim the team were "lucky" then tell me how a team draft an overaged AJHL player in the 3rd round if he was not scouted properly?
How about an overaged small defenseman from Union College in the 3rd round?

This is not luck at all this is great scouting!

We did the same with Norlinder (that was great scouting)

Of course to evaluate a team draft results you have to evaluate the quality of the players drafted around.

If we don't get 1 NHL player out of a draft but there is one or two decent NHL players drafted out of the whole draft you could not blame it on the scouting team. As for 2012, it was loaded with good player at every round and we drafted nothing. Yes there was depth!

 

[Habs Halifax]

I do not get your point. Draft Depth stretch well outside the 2nd round..

Also if you claim the team were "lucky" then tell me how a team draft an overrage AJHL player in the 3rd round if he was not scouted properly?
How about an overrage small defenseman from Union College in the 3rd round?

This is not luck at all this is great scouting!

We did the same with Norlinder (that was great scouting)

Of course to evaluate a team draft results you have to evaluate the quality of the players drafted around.

If we don't get 1 NHL player out of a draft but there is one or two decent NHL players drafted out of the whole draft you could not blame it on the scouting team. As for 2012, itwas loaded with good player at every round and we drafted nothing. Yes there was depth!

12 and 13 draft years were not deep when we had good draft power. Leave it at that. You don't have to agree

 

[Cole Caulifield]

12 and 13 draft years were not deep when we had good draft power. Leave it at that. You don't have to agree

What's his excuse for the 2003 draft ? We had a 3 picks in the first 2 rounds (including a top 10 pick) in one of the deepest, if not the deepest, draft of all time ?

 

[DAChampion]

What's his excuse for the 2003 draft ? We had a 3 picks in the first 2 rounds (including a top 10 pick) in one of the deepest, if not the deepest, draft of all time ?

f***, are we still relitigating 2003?

Since it's important to you, Andrei Kostitsyn was a good player picked at his consensus draft position, but his career was derailed by injuries. It happens.

 

[Habs Halifax]

What's his excuse for the 2003 draft ? We had a 3 picks in the first 2 rounds (including a top 10 pick) in one of the deepest, if not the deepest, draft of all time ?

It's a overall formula that I'm looking at in terms of draft power spread over several draft years. I looked at more than just the Habs and I got a good handle on historic stats and probability of hitting. Not saying our latest group will all be stars but what we have today is very good trends and it's a positive, not a negative. Problem is we have to wait

Timmins is not wrong with what he said. Draft power and what draft year you have good draft power matters. That's why it's best to have your draft power spread out. I actually think we have too much picks in the next draft. Something tells me this 2nd round is not deep with talent

Timmins will either be extended or let go with his latest group. 08-15/16 was not the greatest and for different reasons but he needs to produce with the 17-19 group of guys.

 

[26Mats]

What's his excuse for the 2003 draft ? We had a 3 picks in the first 2 rounds (including a top 10 pick) in one of the deepest, if not the deepest, draft of all time ?

Rumor is urquart was Andre Savard's pick...

Ak was a bad pick, but Timmins' only bad lottery pick. The Galchenyuk pick may well be his 2nd bad pick. But imo it's too early to tell.

Price, McDonagh were lights out picks. Sergachev looking good.

Too early to tell with kk and Caufield.

 

[Adam Michaels]

Rumor is urquart was Andre Savard's pick...

Ak was a bad pick, but Timmins' only bad lottery pick. The Galchenyuk pick may well be his 2nd bad pick. But imo it's too early to tell.

Price, McDonagh were lights out picks. Sergachev looking good.

Too early to tell with kk and Caufield.

I would argue that Galchenyuk is still a good pick in 2012. There are other great players that went after him that would make great picks, as well (Reilly, Forsberg, and Hertl to name just three). But if you look at that draft class, Galchenyuk is first in GP, he's second in goals scored and second in points, only Forsberg is ahead of him in goals and points.

Things didn't go as expected, obviously (his maturity level not up to par being one reason), so it comes off as a bad pick, but when you look at it, he's still at the top of that draft class.

 

[26Mats]

I would argue that Galchenyuk is still a good pick in 2012. There are other great players that went after him that would make great picks, as well (Reilly, Forsberg, and Hertl to name just three). But if you look at that draft class, Galchenyuk is first in GP, he's second in goals scored and second in points, only Forsberg is ahead of him in goals and points.

Things didn't go as expected, obviously (his maturity level not up to par being one reason), so it comes off as a bad pick, but when you look at it, he's still at the top of that draft class.

I wanted him back at the deadline. His trade value was low. He still may be able to turn his career around.

But I judge a draft long term. So will need more time to judge that draft.

The thing is, Stepane Leroux was reporting Timmins was high on Forsberg snd Terrevainen heading into the draft. When asked recently about that draft, Timmins said "we were looking for a center" and dismissed the possibility of taking Forsberg. I don't know if it's MB's decision to go for need or Timmins' or both. But I don't like it one iota. Hope it doesn't cost us yet again with kk.

 

[Adam Michaels]

I wanted him back at the deadline. His trade value was low. He still may be able to turn his career around.

But I judge a draft long term. So will need more time to judge that draft.

The thing is, Stepane Leroux was reporting Timmins was high on Forsberg snd Terrevainen heading into the draft. When asked recently about that draft, Timmins said "we were looking for a center" and dismissed the possibility of taking Forsberg. I don't know if it's MB's decision to go for need or Timmins' or both. But I don't like it one iota. Hope it doesn't cost us yet again with kk.

Interesting that Leroux reported that but there was also a report that said Bergevin was high on Morgan Reilly, but was new and didn't want to step on any toes as soon as he got in, especially with the scouting staff that had already done all of their homework.

Regardless of all that, Galchenyuk wasn't a bad pick.

 

[Habs Icing]

Bergevin beginning and the only draft we had that many high draft picks. There is a significant improvement in term of our development/draft pick. I remember 2 years after the draft: Collberg, Thrower, Bozon, Bradley already looked like bust. The only little hope was on Hudon.

Now for 2017 there are still hopes for Poehling, Brook, Primeau and Fleury.

Those prospects you mentioned were never touched by our development staff. They were simply lousy picks by our scouting staff.

 

[Habs Icing]

You want a report card on TT? Well, here's the perfect one. When the NHL closed shop the Habs had on their roster 5 players drafted by their staff:

Price
Mete
Gally
Lehkonen
Evans.

I may have forgotten one or two.

No more excuses. After 16 years heading the amateur staff you have only 5 players on your roster. Dammit, I could have done a better job just picking names out of a hat.

 

[26Mats]

Interesting that Leroux reported that but there was also a report that said Bergevin was high on Morgan Reilly, but was new and didn't want to step on any toes as soon as he got in, especially with the scouting staff that had already done all of their homework.

Regardless of all that, Galchenyuk wasn't a bad pick.

Yes, that report about MB wanting Reilly makes me think that Timmins also buys into this drafting for need philosophy. It's a terrible philosophy...

I can't anoint Galchenyuk a good pick until he gets his career back on track. There would be too big of a gap between him and at least 4 other picks taken after him if he doesn't (Reilly, Hertl, Forsberg, Terravainen). And surely all of those 4 players were heavily scouted by Timmins and his crew. IMO, the most important aspect of a scout's job is getting top 3, 5, 10 - i.e. early picks - right. That's when all the talent is available. You have to select right.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

Yes, that report about MB wanting Reilly makes me think that Timmins also buys into this drafting for need philosophy. It's a terrible philosophy...

I can't anoint Galchenyuk a good pick until he gets his career back on track. There would be too big of a gap between him and at least 4 other picks taken after him if he doesn't (Reilly, Hertl, Forsberg, Terravainen). And surely all of those 4 players were heavily scouted by Timmins and his crew. IMO, the most important aspect of a scout's job is getting top 3, 5, 10 - i.e. early picks - right. That's when all the talent is available. You have to select right.

I think their philosophy was at equal (or close) talent draft the center or the defenseman. They also have put a lot of emphasis on the players size.

I mean my feeling they pretty much had Galchenyuk (C), Rieilly (D) ans Forsberg (W) as their top available and they went with the center because it was the biggest organizational need of the past two decades.

 

[26Mats]

I think their philosophy was at equal (or close) talent draft the center or the defenseman. They also have put a lot of emphasis on the players size.

I mean my feeling they pretty much had Galchenyuk (C), Rieilly (D) ans Forsberg (W) as their top available and they went with the center because it was the biggest organizational need of the past two decades.

Then they failed to assess who was of equal value. Because Galchenyuk is not in the same league at all as Forsberg and Rielly.

And since they've failed on many players they took to fill needs (McCarron, De la rose, Fucale, Tinordi, etc...) it's time to just forget about need and exclusively focus on who they think has the talent, drive, etc... to be as high end players as possible - regardless of position, or size.

 

[Adam Michaels]

You want a report card on TT? Well, here's the perfect one. When the NHL closed shop the Habs had on their roster 5 players drafted by their staff:

Price
Mete
Gally
Lehkonen
Evans.

I may have forgotten one or two.

No more excuses. After 16 years heading the amateur staff you have only 5 players on your roster. Dammit, I could have done a better job just picking names out of a hat.

One other aspect of the draft we tend to ignore is sometimes the player drafted being used in a trade. So it's an asset that was available to use. So even though he's not on your current roster, the player was still drafted by the scouting staff.

Some examples being Galchenyuk for Domi ; Sergachev for Drouin ; Collberg for Vanek ; Pacioretty for Tatar ; Subban for Weber ; McDonagh for Gomez, etc.

The part of that equation is the amateur scout doesn't really have a say in a trade, so the deal could either reflect poorly or favorably on the scout or poorly or favorably on the GM because he either used the better asset for an inadequate return. Or that the pick was quality enough to be used in an upgrade. Or sometimes, the pick isn't good enough that it ends up being a minor trade of no significance.

 

[The Great Weal]

I would argue that Galchenyuk is still a good pick in 2012. There are other great players that went after him that would make great picks, as well (Reilly, Forsberg, and Hertl to name just three). But if you look at that draft class, Galchenyuk is first in GP, he's second in goals scored and second in points, only Forsberg is ahead of him in goals and points.

Things didn't go as expected, obviously (his maturity level not up to par being one reason), so it comes off as a bad pick, but when you look at it, he's still at the top of that draft class.

That's a poor argument. He's played the most out of anyone, of course his stats will still be up there. 2012 wasn't a good class for forwards either, but there were some stud dmen available. Drafting a defensive liability that already looks done in the NHL and only has a career high of 56 points isn't a good 3rd OA pick in any way.

 

[Chili]

One other aspect of the draft we tend to ignore is sometimes the player drafted being used in a trade. So it's an asset that was available to use. So even though he's not on your current roster, the player was still drafted by the scouting staff.

Some examples being Galchenyuk for Domi ; Sergachev for Drouin ; Collberg for Vanek ; Pacioretty for Tatar ; Subban for Weber ; McDonagh for Gomez, etc.

The part of that equation is the amateur scout doesn't really have a say in a trade, so the deal could either reflect poorly or favorably on the scout or poorly or favorably on the GM because he either used the better asset for an inadequate return. Or that the pick was quality enough to be used in an upgrade. Or sometimes, the pick isn't good enough that it ends up being a minor trade of no significance.

This applies across the league and is why I link the stats back to the original drafting/signing teams (linked at post 12 above if you'd like to view them).

 

[Habs Halifax]

This applies across the league and is why I link the stats back to the original drafting/signing teams (linked at post 12 above if you'd like to view them).

Taking away drafted players from the equation who were traded by the GM and using what's left against the scouting staff is a very poor way to evaluate effectively IMO. Don't you agree?