Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part 8)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,920
East Coast
From the top of my head and without looking more into it here are the centers we could have drafted:
Giroux, Aho, Kuznetsov, Point, Bergeron, Karlsson

If you count from picks from 11-60, that's 17 drafts x 50 = 850 prospects. I rather do a fair evaluation and look at the probability and circumstance. Other teams looking for a center also missed from 11-60. A lot of luck involved IMO.

If Caufield disappoints and Newhook turns into a top 2C, are we going to say Timmins screwed up there too? What about Kotkaniemi vs Hayton?

Like I said in the previous post... 2003 seems to be missed opportunity. J Carter, Getlaf, and M Richards from 11-20 available. That's not a normal draft
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

Vachon23

Registered User
Oct 14, 2015
17,971
20,723
Victoriaville
Got to pick in the top 10 frequently in order to hit on a star at center IMO. Cause how many stars at center were there from 11+ in the last 17 years? I'll let you count them and get back to me. Pretty sure that list is low and the ones who hit, got lucky. 17 years x 20 picks (from 11-30) = 340 prospects. I wonder how many impact centers are there out of 340? Curious. 2003 below seems like we missed opportunity.

- 2003: Kostitsyn vs J Carter, Getlaf, M Richards
- 2005: Price vs Kopitar
- 2016: Sergachev vs ?
- 2018: Kotkaniemi vs ?
- 2019: Caufield vs Newhook?

Timmins has spans where he did very well (05-07 and 17-19) and some spans where he didn't do so well (12-15). And there is this 4 year black hole from 08-11 that's not on him cause of bottom of the league draft power. This is a huge problem today cause they would be Gallagher's age and that's why we have so many holes. 12/13 were major disappointments which didn't help us recover at all

12-15 years are the ones where he deserves heat IMO. Right time to fire him was in 2015. Because we didn't, it gave him time to recover. Now we have to wait to see how the 17+ prospects turn out.

we can’t say he did well in 17-19 way to early and he didn’t do well in 2006. Between 2006 and 2015 the only year he did well was in 2007. There is not a 1000 of reasons why where not good since 2017 and we didn’t have an impact forward since 1995. The principal reason is that where not drafting well. Our impact player are not even player we drafted except Gally
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Habs Icing

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,920
East Coast
we can’t say he did well in 17-19 way to early and he didn’t do well in 2006. Between 2006 and 2015 the only year he did well was in 2006. There is not a 1000 of reasons why where not good since 2017 and we didn’t have an impact forward since 1995. The principal reason is that where not drafting well. Our impact player are not even player we drafted except Gally

I think he did well from 17-19 based on the trends we have seen so far. I don't remember us having that many WJC talent in decades! How good will they be is the unanswered question. Regardless, he made very solid picks that have trended well. Kotkaniemi was rushed and that's not on Timmins

Making solid picks where the prospect trends well in draft +1/+2/+3 but fails to develop in the 20-23 age range. Is that on Timmins or Coaches or the player?
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

Vachon23

Registered User
Oct 14, 2015
17,971
20,723
Victoriaville
I think he did well from 17-19 based on the trends we have seen so far. I don't remember us having that many WJC talent in decades! How good will they be is the unanswered question. Regardless, he made very solid picks that have trended well. Kotkaniemi was rushed and that's not on Timmins

except KK any of those guys are in the NHL. I don’t care about the WJC they are a tons of players that had success at this tournament and never make anything in the NHL.
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,920
East Coast
except KK any of those guys are in the NHL. I don’t care about the WJC they are a tons of players that had success at this tournament and never make anything in the NHL.

So you would rather a group of guys that didn't make the WJC and are not trending well? Timmins job is to find players with positive trends from 15-17/18 and determine if they can continue that from ages 18-20. He has done that in the 2017-2019 draft years. Now it's on the coaches and the player to continue it from age 20+. A player struggling after they turn pro... Do you think that's on Timmins?

You can be pessimistic if you want. I rather have what we have than not have it. And yes, I expect surprises and disappointments. However, probability is working in our favor due to quantity. That's the secrete most overlook. Teams that have done well have had high draft power over a span of drafts. I've spent a lot of time looking into that. It's not a guarantee either, just a trend that you can see if you put every team in a basket and look at how they came out a better team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

Vachon23

Registered User
Oct 14, 2015
17,971
20,723
Victoriaville
So you would rather a group of guys that didn't make the WJC and are not trending well? Timmins job is to find players with positive trends from 15-17/18 and determine if they can continue that from 18-20. He has done that in the 17-19 draft years. Now it's on the coaches and the player.

You can be pessimistic if you want. I rather have what we have than not have it. And yes, I expect surprises and disappointments. However, probability is working in our favor due to quantity

I prefer player that will an impact in that NHL and that didn’t play in the WJC. his job is to find player that will be good for 10 years not player that are good right know. If these player finish by having a career great they would be a good draft but for know it’s way to early to say they are good draft and the fact is that in 10 years he only had 1 good draft
 
  • Like
Reactions: JeffreyLFC

JeffreyLFC

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
9,830
6,979
I prefer player that will an impact in that NHL and that didn’t play in the WJC. his job is to find player that will be good for 10 years not player that are good right know. If these player finish by having a career great they would be a good draft but for know it’s way to early to say they are good draft and the fact is that in 10 years he only had 1 good draft
Thank you, WJC is just a prospect hype machine. We have seen many players go there dominate and don't achieve anything after.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vachon23

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,920
East Coast
I prefer player that will an impact in that NHL and that didn’t play in the WJC. his job is to find player that will be good for 10 years not player that are good right know. If these player finish by having a career great they would be a good draft but for know it’s way to early to say they are good draft and the fact is that in 10 years he only had 1 good draft

Of course. But now the conversation is shifting now. 17-19 draft years are positive, not negative when you look at trends. Expecting up/down like a stock market graft should be expected. And expecting surprises and disappointments should also be expected. Probability is working in our favor due to quantity

I have full confidence 17-19 turns out better than 12-14.
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,920
East Coast
Thank you, WJC is just a prospect hype machine. We have seen many players go there dominate and don't achieve anything after.

Duh. But I think you two are missing the point. You are complaining that our picks made the tournament and are not starts at 20 or 21 so far. I rather have the various WJC talent vs not have it. If we didn't have it, you would be all over it trying to use that as reasons why Timmins sucks

Spin it anyway you want... 17-19 are positive, not negative. And yes, some will bust. With me, it comes down to our draft power ranking vs how the results end up. So far, it's 10th in draft power and 7th in results. Timmins has "appeared" to recover but it's early.
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

Vachon23

Registered User
Oct 14, 2015
17,971
20,723
Victoriaville
Of course. But now the conversation is shifting now. 17-19 draft years are positive, not negative when you look at trends. Expecting up/down like a stock market graft should be expected. And expecting surprises and disappointments should also be expected. Probability is working in our favor due to quantity

I have full confidence 17-19 turns out better than 12-14.

17-19 are just to early to evaluate. We can’t say that a draft is a success when any of those player are in the NHL
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,920
East Coast
17-19 are just to early to evaluate. We can’t say that a draft is a success when any of those player are in the NHL

Too early to evaluate as a definite evaluation yes. But the trends are positive and you should not ignore or be pessimistic about it. Having that kind of WJC talent is a positive, not a negative. All you are saying is some will bust. I agree with you bud cause it happens. But probability is working in our favor due to quantity so it's also reasonable we hit here and there too.

I rather have what we have than not have it. It's early to some degree yes. Do you think it takes a massive turn and the 17-19 years are worse or the same as 12-14?
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

JeffreyLFC

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
9,830
6,979
Duh. But I think you two are missing the point. You are complaining that our picks made the tournament and are not starts at 20 or 21 so far. I rather have the various WJC talent vs not have it. If we didn't have it, you would be all over it trying to use that as reasons why Timmins sucks

Spin it anyway you want... 17-19 are positive, not negative. And yes, some will bust
Let's look at the WJC from those years.

From 2017, as of right now, it's not looking that good for Poehling and Brook. One is looking good Primeau (7th round pick!)

Now to the next bunch in 2018: Ylonen, Romanov, Olofsson, Harris. Too early to tell. Romanov is looking good though.

From 2019: Caufield, Norlinder. I like both but it is way too early to tell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vachon23

WeThreeKings

Habs cup - its in the BAG
Sep 19, 2006
91,137
91,598
Halifax
I've never had a big problem with Timmins, although the Tinordi and Leblanc drafts were horrible.

But, I've been saying for years that he's a remaining vestige of the years of mediocrity we've been toiling in since the early 2000s. He needs to be removed along with everyone not named Ducharme, Richardson, Waite and Bouchard (who were brought in later and have done their jobs admirably to this point), to start fresh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Takeru and montreal

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,920
East Coast
Let's look at the WJC from those years.

From 2017, as of right now, it's not looking that good for Poehling and Brook. One is looking good Primeau (7th round pick!)

Now to the next bunch in 2018: Ylonen, Romanov, Olofsson, Harris. Too early to tell. Romanov is looking good though.

From 2019: Caufield, Norlinder. I like both but it is way too early to tell.

Fully aware of the up/down trajection that fluctuates year to year. Basically, you are taking the pessimistic side of things cause they don't look like Suzuki at 20. Last year Kotkaneimi was the golden boy and this year Suzuki is. I expect more up/down bias to come with our fan base cause we are so trendy. Romanov struggles next year and you likely are all over it. You likely are counting out Brook and Poehling cause they had meh pro years at 20.

I'm looking at the bigger picture. Probability is working in our favor due to quantity. If we had Fonstad, McShane, Houde in 2015, they would be signed. Our prospect group from 17-19 is very solid. Several WJC caliber talent is just one measure and you can focus solely on that if you wish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

Vachon23

Registered User
Oct 14, 2015
17,971
20,723
Victoriaville
Too early to evaluate as a definite evaluation yes. But the trends are positive and you should not ignore or be pessimistic about it. Having that kind of WJC talent is a positive, not a negative. All you are saying is some will bust. I agree with you bud cause it happens. But probability is working in our favor due to quantity so it's also reasonable we hit here and there too.

I rather have what we have than not have it. It's early to some degree yes. Do you think it takes a massive turn and the 17-19 years are worse or the same as 12-14?

My point is that we don’t know what will happen. I don’t care if the trends is positive and it’s not like if our Prospect pool was THAT special. Yes I like what I see but in fact we don’t know what will happen with these prospect and it’s way to early to call these draft is a success.
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,920
East Coast
My point is that we don’t know what will happen. I don’t care if the trends is positive and it’s not like if our Prospect pool was THAT special. Yes I like what I see but in fact we don’t know what will happen with these prospect and it’s way to early to call these draft is a success.

You are right, we don't know what will happen. I agree with you on that. But the trends are positive and several prospects have accomplished a lot. I will ask again.. Do you think the 17-19 drafts ends up worse or the same as 12-14 based on what you know today?

I'm saying we have tons of guys that will turn into stars. I'm measuring draft power against actual results in development and games played in the NHL. 10th in draft power and 7th in results heading into last season. I will update it to include last season here shortly but focused on playing golf at the moment lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

JeffreyLFC

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
9,830
6,979
Fully aware of the up/down trajection that fluctuates year to year. Basically, you are taking the pessimistic side of things cause they don't look like Suzuki at 20. Last year Kotkaneimi was the golden boy and this year Suzuki is. I expect more up/down bias to come with our fan base cause we are so trendy. Romanov struggles next year and you likely are all over it. You likely are counting out Brook and Poehling cause they had meh pro years at 20.
Well you selected these years 2017 to 2019.

We can go from 2003 to 2016 if you want...
 

The Great Weal

Phil's Pizza
Jan 15, 2015
52,068
64,494
again it's just incorrect, Price ended up last year as one of the best goalies in the league when compared with goalies that played a high number of games. That shows that he was able to put up solid numbers in front of a weak team and defense while also dealing with the wear and tear of playing so damn much, only one goalie in the league played more games then Price and it was 1 more game. Among goalies that played 60 or more games Price had the best save % and gaa.

Elite Prospects - NHL Stats 2018-2019

So clearly last year he was not the problem or else his numbers over 66 games wouldn't be the best among goalies with 60 or more starts or among the best with goalies with 50 or more starts. That's at least 1 of the 3 years, I didn't pay attention to him this year or the Habs so I can't really say. I'd have to look at the numbers for 3 years ago but didn't feel like it.

Has Galchenyuk ever scored 30 goals? Yes then he's a 30 goal scorer. It's not complicated. Has he scored multi 30 goal seasons, No. End of story there

We'll see what happens as Timmins, MB, Molson, Julien, not of them seem to be going anywhere. The system is looking good for blueliners for sure, which is Timmins strength. Galchenyuk should have been better, but it could be the off-ice problems have impacted him. We'll see if he can keep it up with the Wild or not. The Habs must hit on Kotka, who so many on this board wanted at the draft.

From the start of last year to January, Price played 30 games(numerous other starters have played around that much) and Price ranks 12th out of 15th in save percentage with goalies that have played a minimum of 28 games. He was outplayed by the last place goalie in Craig Anderson. There is no reason to randomly bring up a 60 game basis when during the FIRST 30 games, he's not alone in games played and he shit to bed hard. When a player getting paid 10.5 million is playing like crap for half a season, that is a problem.

Has Galchenyuk found a full time spot with an NHL team this year? No, they all thought he had negative value making him a catastrophic selection at 3rd overall. We both know that is a bit extreme and unjust, just like calling him a 30 goalscorer when he's scored over 20 once half a decade ago. We could call him a FORMER 30 goalscorer, that makes sense, just like we can call him a FORMER top 6 player. Neither of which are even close to being true right.

I don't see a single prospect that has top pairing upside, the system has a bunch of potential low end players. Many thought Josh Brook was a surefire top pairing dman, and that blew up in their face this year. Many thought Victor Mete was the next Jared Spurgeon, he's gotten worse every year after his rookie year.

There's a lot of value here, but I do have a few objections.

1) Price playing 70 games a year and not succeeding at it is not on Price and not on Timmins. It's on Bergevin and Julien. The goalie should simply not be playing that many games in a year. Price is also overpaid, but that is also on Bergevin. He's simply not the elite goaltender that he once was, but Bergevin treated him as such based on ... I don't even know.

There is probably not a lot that Price can do to be better. Independently of the fact that he has accumulated several substantial injuries, he is a month shy of 33 years old. His body is in an advancing state of physiological decay, and he probably no longer has elite potential. For example, it is well known that the speed of reflexes slow with age. There is nothing that Price can do about it. He will never be as fast and as quick as when he was 25.

The aging process is the one force that eventually defeats every single athlete.

2) The stuff about Kotkaniemi not listening to his coaches was in Montreal, where the coaches were playing him ten minutes a game and he was not progressing. He was improving drastically and consistently in Laval, at both ends of the ice. He showed some excellent vision and forechecking ability. You neglect some of the positive things that Bouchard said about him. Don't you think that you'd be more balanced in including both the critical and approving comments?

You should also acknowledge that just the fact that Kotkaniemi improved in Laval is great. I honestly suspect that he would have been the third line center down there if Sylvain Lefebvre had been the coach, and perhaps he would have been bounced around playing different positions.

1) I absolutely agree. However, we were talking about where a Timmins drafted team would be in the standings, which would have been bottom in the league in my opinion. The offense would be one of the worst forward cores in NHL history, the defense would be average to above average, and the goaltending is inconsistent as shown by Prices performance in the last 3 years.

2) I'm pretty sure Joel Bouchard said that KK didn't listen to him either. I believe he said something along the lines of "He's got to stop saying yes, but to criticism". I'm still not impressed with his skating and strength, he's got 1 goal in 13 games which was an empty netter, and I'm sure playing with a guy like Hudon didn't hurt. Nevertheless, 13 points in 13 games is awesome, but it's not a large enough sample size. Besides our 3rd overall pick, I'm not optimistic about any other player that was part of our system. There are some nice surprises with guys like Evans, Fleury and Vejdemo, but I don't see any of them being more than decent NHL players at best.
 

Vachon23

Registered User
Oct 14, 2015
17,971
20,723
Victoriaville
You are right, we don't know what will happen. I agree with you on that. But the trends are positive and several prospects have accomplished a lot. I will ask again.. Do you think the 17-19 drafts ends up worse or the same as 12-14 based on what you know today?

Of course I like more our prospect pool then in 2015. This prospect pool was awful back then but I can’t call 17-19 good draft right know. The only think I can say Is that between 2006 and 2015 he had only 1 good year and it’s in 2007 and that’s not normal
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Great Weise

The Great Weal

Phil's Pizza
Jan 15, 2015
52,068
64,494
Of course I like more our prospect pool then in 2015. This prospect pool was awful back then but I can’t call 17-19 good draft right know. The only think I can say Is that between 2006 and 2015 he had only 1 good year and it’s in 2007 and that’s not normal
I should hope the prospect pool looks better since 2017, we haven't made the playoffs since.
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,920
East Coast
Of course I like more our prospect pool then in 2015. This prospect pool was awful back then but I can’t call 17-19 good draft right know. The only think I can say Is that between 2006 and 2015 he had only 1 good year and it’s in 2007 and that’s not normal

So you agree. The trends are positive and in line with our draft power? I think there is an outside chance 17-19 is close to 05-07. Wait for the replies... "There is no chance that will happen" lol. We will see how it turns out and I am very curious myself. We do seem to lack stars but after I look beyond that, I see a lot of options where if one guy bust, we have one that surprises.

A good draft year? 07 is one of the best draft years you will see from any team. That's not just good, that's historic. A good draft year to me is you beat your draft power or close to par. Most of our fan base don't spend the time to properly evaluate and I've seen the cherry picking evaluation done far to often. 08-11 is not on Timmins due to horrible draft power. 12-15 is on Timmins though (Middle of the pack in draft power and near bottom of the league in results). Those 8 years in a row are the reason why our fan base is pessimistic about our drafting and if the 17-19 years will be good or not. Those 8 years are also a reason why we are rushing prospects today cause we have holes to fill and players don't want to sign in Montreal. No way Kotkaniemi plays NHL at 18 if we had better center depth.

To me, Timmins deserves a lot of heat for 4 of the 17 years and the 4 years prior to that was on the GM for trading so many picks away.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

Vachon23

Registered User
Oct 14, 2015
17,971
20,723
Victoriaville
So you agree. The trends are positive and in line with our draft power? I think there is an outside chance 17-19 is close to 05-07. Wait for the replies... "There is no chance that will happen" lol.

A good draft year? 07 is one of the best draft years you will see from any team. That's not just good, that's historic. A good draft year to me is you beat your draft power or close to par. Most of our fan base don't spend the time to properly evaluate and I've seen the cherry picking evaluation done far to often. 08-11 is not on Timmins due to horrible draft power. 12-15 is on Timmins though (Middle of the pack in draft power and near bottom of the league in results). Those 8 years in a row are the reason why our fan base is pessimistic about our drafting and if the 17-19 years will be good or not. Those 8 years are also a reason why we are rushing prospects today cause we have holes to fill and players don't want to sign in Montreal. No way Kotkaniemi plays NHL at 18 if we had better center depth.

To me, Timmins deserves a lot of heat for 4 of the 17 years and the 4 years prior to that was on the GM for trading so many picks away.

1 extreme good year and 9 bad year in 10 years then and 17-19 draft are the same for the 30 others teams to, it’s jus to early
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,920
East Coast
1 extreme good year and 9 bad year in 10 years then

05-07 was awesome
08-11 was one of the worse 4 year spans you will see (Lacked draft power and that's not on Timmins soley)
12-15 was very disappointing.. especially 12 and 13 drafts. Middle of the pack in draft power in those 4 years and near bottom of the league in results.

So far 16-19 is positive to me cause we are doing better in results vs draft power. Like I said, that was what I found heading into this past season so I have to update it to include last season. I'll do that before the next season starts.

You are right, it's early. I agree. But that don't mean we can look at the trends on where it's tracking. Poehling and Brook not having good seasons in their 1st pro year at 20 is not a huge concern of mine. If they do that again next year, then it's a concern. We have to look at the bigger picture cause we don't appear to have a star but we do appear to have lots of potential for impact players. We will see how it measures up against draft power cause that's the fair evaluation IMO
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

Vachon23

Registered User
Oct 14, 2015
17,971
20,723
Victoriaville
05-07 was awesome
08-11 was one of the worse 4 year spans you will see (Lacked draft power and that's not on Timmins soley)
12-15 was very disappointing.. especially 12 and 13 drafts. Middle of the pack in draft power in those 4 years and near bottom of the league in results.

So far 16-19 is positive to me cause we are doing better in results vs draft power. Like I said, that was what I found heading into this past season so I have to update it.

2006 was awesome ??? In 2010 they trade a 2nd pick to advanced for Tinordi that’s on him. 2009 and 2011 I agree he didn’t had alote of pick
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->