Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part 9)

[Habs Halifax]

Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part 8)




Interesting graft I came across... Were they wrong? Kotkaniemi, Romanov, Harris, Ylonen, Hillis, Olofsson, Stapley? This has been a focus on mine for a few years now... DRAFT POWER! Those of you who think Timmins sucks, need to do some homework on draft power vs results.

Click to read more...

 

[DAChampion]

I love this argument.

You go to your fridge for some milk. You look at the date and it expired on Sept 1. You can't be bothered throwing it so you put it back in the fridge. Your wife goes for some milk a week later and tells you this milk expired on Sept 1. You answer yeah but today is not Sept 1. It's Sept 30.

To what extent would you need to see the prospect pool progress in the next ~12 months for you to change your mind and to say that Timmins' recent work has been promising, and that optimism is warranted?

 

[Miller Time]

On the contrary. The realities of the Montreal market are such, that we will NEVER be an elite team without elite drafting and development. Anything below elite is just a waste of time.

Now, we have fired Lefebvre and brought in Bouchard. I have my reservations about this guy, but the majority seems to be head over heels with him. So let's suppose that's elite development.

We have Julien as the head coach. There are many who would still consider him to be among the elite coaches in the NHL. He presided over the growth of some absolutely fantastic players in Boston. Then there's Dusharme as Julien's potential successor, also the majority's darling.

And then there's Timmins. Even if we concede to his defenders' arguments, I still don't see an elite head scout. I very much doubt the guys doing the drafting in Tampa, Carolina or Chicago would require the same kind of defense to convince people they know what they're doing.

en elite head scout is of no use if the GM is bad at asset/roster/staff management...

imagine what the past decade looks like with McDo instead of Gomez, of what right now looks like with Sergachev instead of Drouin.

Even if one argues that Timmins is not "elite", i don't think a case can be made that his batting average is anything less than top tier, both at drafting some absolute studs and in drafting future NHL players.

As long as the GM makes boneheaded asset decisions, even the so-called "elite" head of scouting/drafting wouldn't make a shred of difference

 

[Habs Icing]

To what extent would you need to see the prospect pool progress in the next ~12 months for you to change your mind and to say that Timmins' recent work has been promising, and that optimism is warranted?

If TT were a recent hire, I would say that 12 months would not be enough time. But that's the time restriction you placed. Also what do you consider as recent work? Do we start at '15, '16, '17, '18, '19? If we start at '18 that's not enough time for the prospects to show what they'll become. In the case of KK for example we're still speculating. I don't see much of an offensive talent. Some posters do. Neither one of us has enough proof for our opinion..

Having said that, at the end of this season I want to see indications without any doubt that Juulsen will eventually become a 2nd pair d-man, same with Mete, Primeau will be a star goalie, Brook will eventually become a top pair d-man, Poehling a bonafide middle line player, that KK is worth his 3rd OA status and can be an offensive 2nd line stud center , Romanov will be a top pair d-man, Ylonen will become a middle line player.

That's eight players drafted from '15 to '18. My instincts tell me one, two at the most, will come close to indicating that.

Now for my counter-argument. You and many TT defenders fall back on this recency argument as if we shouldn't count his previous 14, 15, 16 years - and those years depend on when you start drawing a line in the sand. And it seems that line for Timmins is always being moved up.

 

[DAChampion]

If TT were a recent hire, I would say that 12 months would not be enough time. But that's the time restriction you placed. Also what do you consider as recent work? Do we start at '15, '16, '17, '18, '19? If we start at '18 that's not enough time for the prospects to show what they'll become. In the case of KK for example we're still speculating. I don't see much of an offensive talent. Some posters do. Neither one of us has enough proof for our opinion..

Having said that, at the end of this season I want to see indications without any doubt that Juulsen will eventually become a 2nd pair d-man, same with Mete, Primeau will be a star goalie, Brook will eventually become a top pair d-man, Poehling a bonafide middle line player, that KK is worth his 3rd OA status and can be an offensive 2nd line stud center , Romanov will be a top pair d-man, Ylonen will become a middle line player.

That's eight players drafted from '15 to '18. My instincts tell me one, two at the most, will come close to indicating that.

Now for my counter-argument. You and many TT defenders fall back on this recency argument as if they don't count his previous 14, 15 years - depending on when you start drawing a line in the sand. And it seems that line for Timmins is always being moved up.

Thank you for answering. I think that your answer is reasonable. It also comes with internal flexibility, for example you have lofty expectations of Brook but none of Struble, Harris, or Norlinder. That can flip in a year which is fine.

As for myself, I don't always move the timetable. Lefebvre is gone and by the end of this year we'll have completed three years of post-Lefebvre. Julien may not be perfect with prospects, but he's a vast improvement over Therrien.

Here's what I'd like to see in the next twelve months:
- Strong evidence that at least two of Juulsen, Brook, Romanov, are progressing to be top-4 dmen.
- Strong and convincing progression from at least two of Fleury, Norlinder, Harris, Struble;
- Strong progression from Ylonen, Caulfield, and Poehling indicating that at least two should become effective middle-six forwards.
- Kotkaniemi convincing us that he was worth a 3rd overall pick.
- Bonus: a season of good progression from Primeau.
- Bonus: Evans and Mete cement their status as legitimate NHL regulars.
- Bonus: Signs of life and unexpected progression from even one or two of Ikonen, Vejdemo, Olofsson, LeGuerrier, Teasdale, Hillis, etc.

Caveats -- I won't have the necessary expertise to evaluate the 2020 draft, and I'll only be watching the AHL prospects.

 

[Habs Icing]

Thank you for answering. I think that your answer is reasonable. It also comes with internal flexibility, for example you have lofty expectations of Brook but none of Struble, Harris, or Norlinder. That can flip in a year which is fine.

As for myself, I don't always move the timetable. Lefebvre is gone and by the end of this year we'll have completed three years of post-Lefebvre. Julien may not be perfect with prospects, but he's a vast improvement over Therrien.

Here's what I'd like to see in the next twelve months:
- Strong evidence that at least two of Juulsen, Brook, Romanov, are progressing to be top-4 dmen.
- Strong and convincing progression from at least two of Fleury, Norlinder, Harris, Struble;
- Strong progression from Ylonen, Caulfield, and Poehling indicating that at least two should become effective middle-six forwards.
- Kotkaniemi convincing us that he was worth a 3rd overall pick.
- Bonus: a season of good progression from Primeau.
- Bonus: Evans and Mete cement their status as legitimate NHL regulars.
- Bonus: Signs of life and unexpected progression from even one or two of Ikonen, Vejdemo, Olofsson, LeGuerrier, Teasdale, Hillis, etc.

Caveats -- I won't have the necessary expertise to evaluate the 2020 draft, and I'll only be watching the AHL prospects.

And if fate grants you all that you wish for and only what you wish for, what sort of prospect pool do you think we will have? I say a middle of the pack prospect pool. No top pairing d-men. You hedged your bet with the phrasing top 4 d-man, No top line fowards. No power forwards and no elite goal tender. Even if all your wishes - all of them - come true, we have a so-so prospect pool. And this is TT at his best.

 

[Habs Halifax]

And if fate grants you all that you wish for and only what you wish for, what sort of prospect pool do you think we will have? I say a middle of the pack prospect pool. No top pairing d-men. You hedged your bet with the phrasing top 4 d-man, No top line fowards. No power forwards and no elite goal tender. Even if all your wishes - all of them - come true, we have a so-so prospect pool. And this is TT at his best.

No disrespect but I don't think you have done enough research to provide value on your knee jerk opinion. Was it you who said this... "You are fed up". Would you be willing to admit to some degree that your frustration is affecting your judgement? It sounds like you think there are 10 stars per draft (or more) and half the NHL has a better pool than us because other teams have several "elite" level prospects.

Being pessimistic without unbias research is the cheapest thing you can do. Did you know that since the 16+ draft years, Habs prospects are 7th in total points, 1st in games played, and 14th in pts/game. I think we are in the top 10 as it stands today and this don't even factor in Suzuki. Those are my findings and it's early, but have not factored in the last season yet. I've spent a lot of time (unbias approach) on this and I'm pretty sure it's substantially more than the time you put into it. Laugh at it all you want. Until you provide unbias research, you got no leg to stand on bud. All you have is frustration and we can smell it a mile away

16-19 drafts (not including this past season):
- 1st in NHL games played
- 7th in total points
- 14th in pts/game
- 10th in draft power

I think Timmins is on track to meet his draft power since the 16+ draft years in terms of producing NHL results. I can't stress this enough... it's 2020, not 2015 anymore! I think this is the flaw in your miss calculation due to being "fed up" from the drafting 08-15 years

 

[DAChampion]

And if fate grants you all that you wish for and only what you wish for, what sort of prospect pool do you think we will have? I say a middle of the pack prospect pool. No top pairing d-men. You hedged your bet with the phrasing top 4 d-man, No top line fowards. No power forwards and no elite goal tender. Even if all your wishes - all of them - come true, we have a so-so prospect pool. And this is TT at his best.

That's a very good point. I am being generous. Too generous.

There should be at least two players from the above lists that will be worthy of being first line forwards or first pairing dmen. But I'm skeptical that any of them will convince us of that in the next 12 months. But it will be necessary.

 

[Whitesnake]

4th I don't care about your stance or your opinions or any other posters on Lefebvre unless they watched the same amount of games over the years that I did. I know what I saw, I was right about him. I don't get personal, my point is how many years after he's gone do we need to talk about to what degree Lefebvre was shitty. It's 3 years now that he's gone, nothing we say will change what happened, you and I and some others have been talking about him for going on 9 years. You don't get tired of typing all this shit out, trying to remember what he did to each prospect over 6 years and how it impacted them? What's the point of it? He's gone, it's long over, it's not and never was all his fault and no one i have seen say it was and if they do we can just tell them they are wrong.

It's all semantics at this point. People, despite the bad recent years, wanted to keep Timmins. Blaming Lefebvre for Timmins mistakes. As simple as that. Whether the word is great, superb, best, top 5 or whatever, the overall opinion was that despite the serious lack of prospects, the Habs HAD to keep Timmins. That it would be a big mistake firing him. That he was turning the corner. That all he needed was better picks.

I've also watched tons of AHL games just like I watched tons of Blainville game. Reason why 2-3 years before he was fired, I wanted Lefebvre to be fired. And why I wanted, before anyone mentioned it, to hire Bouchard. Nobody is defending Lefebvre. I'm replacing the Lefebvre failures also in context. You don't have the luxury to put things in context ONLY for people you like. Lefebre was bad 'cause he was indeed unable to improve some prospects. And was unable to make his team a better team.

You don't like repeating yourself? Fine. Don't respond to me then. And if you think I should be tired of repeating always the same thing, how about you ask people who keeps reminding us of the Lefevbre era too? Will you do that too? Or are your attacks solely regarding my posts? To which again I say if you are tired of seeing or responding to my posts...just don't.

Not really. He comes off as someone who sees the crap TT and his staff have been passing off as talented prospects and is fed up. During TT's tenure we went through 7 coaches, three GMs, two owners and I can't count the number of players. But the common thread through all those eras: a lack of talented players. Where do you get most of your players: through the head scout. The two most popular excuses for his pathetic work:

1) He has been deprived of picks and good picks. Since he's been here he has made 127 picks. How many picks should he have had? 03 and 04 each team had 9 picks so that's 18. The rest of the years it was 7 picks. 7 picks X 15 drafts = 98. 98 + 18 is 116 picks he should have had. He had 127 instead. So he wasn't deprived of picks. No, no, he was deprived of #1s is the flip side of that excuse. He has been here for 17 drafts. He has had 17 first round picks. And then the excuses get even more ridiculous, he has had low first round picks. My answer is why the puck do we need a head scout if the answer is high draft picks. And if you're not satisfied with that answer go look at the botched first round picks we've had in the last 17 drafts: Starting with Andre K. and then going on to Chipchura, Fischer, Leblanc, Tinordi, Beaulieu, Galchenyuk, McCarron, Sherbak. And I won't count the last 5 years. He may geta hit or two there.

2) The second reason is that we had dumb GMs and they gave away his great picks. I can think of only two trades that screwed TT's picks where we didn't get equal value in return: McDonagh and Sergachev. That's it. How many trades did we make where the GMs received added value: Domi-Galchenyuk as an example. Pacioretty as another.

No, Whitesnake is not a zealot. He's a fed-up fan like many of us.

Watch out now. Seems there are certain things we can't say anymore....Timmins is great and there for life. Strange that nobody seems to want to hire for GM though. I guess it's because he's not interested.....

Timmins is the least of our hockey ops problems...

President. GM.

Any personnel changes that doesn't involve upgrading either or both of those roles is just shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic

The day that you think the GM is the problem, is the day you need to see what decisions he made and starts believing they might be a problem too....

No disrespect but I don't think you have done enough research to provide value on your knee jerk opinion. Was it you who said this... "You are fed up". Would you be willing to admit to some degree that your frustration is affecting your judgement? It sounds like you think there are 10 stars per draft (or more) and half the NHL has a better pool than us because other teams have several "elite" level prospects.

Being pessimistic without unbias research is the cheapest thing you can do. Did you know that since the 16+ draft years, Habs prospects are 7th in total points, 1st in games played, and 14th in pts/game. I think we are in the top 10 as it stands today and this don't even factor in Suzuki. Those are my findings and it's early, but have not factored in the last season yet. I've spent a lot of time (unbias approach) on this and I'm pretty sure it's substantially more than the time you put into it. Laugh at it all you want. Until you provide unbias research, you got no leg to stand on bud. All you have is frustration and we can smell it a mile away

16-19 drafts (not including this past season):
- 1st in NHL games played
- 7th in total points
- 14th in pts/game
- 10th in draft power

I think Timmins is on track to meet his draft power since the 16+ draft years in terms of producing NHL results. I can't stress this enough... it's 2020, not 2015 anymore! I think this is the flaw in your miss calculation due to being "fed up" from the drafting 08-15 years

So your analysis is practically 2 players. A top 9 pick. And a top 3 pick. And that top 9 pics has the LUXURY to have been traded to probably the winner of the Stanley Cup. Do you not realize that? Do you know that if the GM isn't a complete idiot, that top 9 pick has nothing like those numbers? Does it mean that Sergachev is a bad pick? Of course not. He is. But using numbers provided by another team, especially maybe THE best team in the league...sorry it makes no sense.

So what you are saying is that if we would have used 08-11, we should have fired him then? Though at that time, we also had Gallagher and Beaulieu.

 

[The Great Weal]

Interesting graft I came across... Were they wrong? Kotkaniemi, Romanov, Harris, Ylonen, Hillis, Olofsson, Stapley? This has been a focus on mine for a few years now... DRAFT POWER! Those of you who think Timmins sucks, need to do some homework on draft power vs results.

I don't know what draft power has to do with any of this:
2009: Kreider/Johansson/Palmieri
2010: Kuznetsov/Hayes/Coyle/Nelson/Faulk
2011: Klefbom/Rakell
2012: Rielly/Lindholm
2013: Theodore(only 1 player but it's a tough miss for someone who has drafting defenseman as a specialty)
2014: I'll excuse Scherbak since nobody good was drafted after him within like 15ish picks, but he drafted Lernout and Point went a few picks later.
2015: Beauvillier/Aho
2016: Good 1st round pick or the first time in nearly a decade
2017: Still early, but Poehling and his attitude issues look really bad while there is Frost who looks promising and maybe more in the next few years

Even if every other pick after those were all busts, it's still really bad how we haven't drafted at least 2 of the players I listed in those 7 years. Add Theodore and Kuznetsov to this team and we would be a top team in the league. It's unheard of for a team to build a top team in the league by trading/signing for every player on the team.

 

[Habs Halifax]

So your analysis is practically 2 players. A top 9 pick. And a top 3 pick. And that top 9 pics has the LUXURY to have been traded to probably the winner of the Stanley Cup. Do you not realize that? Do you know that if the GM isn't a complete idiot, that top 9 pick has nothing like those numbers? Does it mean that Sergachev is a bad pick? Of course not. He is. But using numbers provided by another team, especially maybe THE best team in the league...sorry it makes no sense.

So what you are saying is that if we would have used 08-11, we should have fired him then? Though at that time, we also had Gallagher and Beaulieu.

Same rules applies to all teams equally. There is zero bias

I don't know what draft power has to do with any of this:
2009: Kreider/Johansson/Palmieri
2010: Kuznetsov/Hayes/Coyle/Nelson/Faulk
2011: Klefbom/Rakell
2012: Rielly/Lindholm
2013: Theodore(only 1 player but it's a tough miss for someone who has drafting defenseman as a specialty)
2014: I'll excuse Scherbak since nobody good was drafted after him within like 15ish picks, but he drafted Lernout and Point went a few picks later.
2015: Beauvillier/Aho
2016: Good 1st round pick or the first time in nearly a decade
2017: Still early, but Poehling and his attitude issues look really bad while there is Frost who looks promising and maybe more in the next few years

Even if every other pick after those were all busts, it's still really bad how we haven't drafted at least 2 of the players I listed in those 7 years. Add Theodore and Kuznetsov to this team and we would be a top team in the league. It's unheard of for a team to build a top team in the league by trading/signing for every player on the team.

I've looked into draft power vs results from 2008+ draft years. There is a trend but you can ignore draft power if you wish. And yes, it's not a direct linear line like you are looking at.

Best drafting teams from 08-19 are the Ducks, Lightning, Sens, Caps, Preds, Islanders, Flames, Wings, Kings, Bruins, Wild, Blue Jackets, Canes... to name the top 13.

The formulas I built are... I have other ideas but this takes hours/days/weeks when you work a full time job.

Draft Position Strength Formula: #1 OA(x100) + 2-5(x50) + 6-10(x25) + 11-31(x15) + 32-75(x5) + 76-125(x2) + 126-217(x1)

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Draft Pick Hit Score Formula: Elite(x50) + Top 9F/4D(x25) + Starting Goalie(x25) + Depth (x1) / Bust

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Rating Score Formula: Games(x1) + Points(x25) / Draft Position Strength x Draft Pick Hit Score

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Habs are ranked 28th from 08-19. But ranked 7th from 16-19 so far. Yes it's early. We have turned to corner but some are in denial

 

[Whitesnake]

Having said all of that, yes, Timmins is looking better. With the likes of Romanov and Norlinder, you might have a repeat McDonagh/Subban. Frankly, while he did make some mistakes on D too, and while it will never happen 'cause that would be a regression....I'd name him in change of goalies/D's draft. And I let somebody else, not Churla, handled the forwards. Discrepancy in his evaluations between D's and forwards is stunning.

 

[The Great Weal]

I've looked into draft power vs results from 2008+ draft years. There is a trend but you can ignore draft power if you wish. And yes, it's not a direct linear line like you are looking at

Ignore what though? Imagine if 213 or so of the players I didn't mention were all busts. Why couldn't we draft at least 2 of those guys that weren't busts and are actually good to very good players and were drafted close to our picks? 2014 we didn't miss on anyone in the 1st, but then we miss out on Point.

 

[Whitesnake]

Same rules applies to all teams equally. There is zero bias

But teams that drafted early are usually NOT the best team in the league. How many teams have drafted top 10 and THEN traded their top 10 player to another team, namely one of the beset IF not the best team in the laegue. You don't think that will completely change the numbers he would have had under a more struggling team?

The rules might be equal. But the context is completely different especially for Sergachev.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Ignore what though? Imagine if 213 or so of the players I didn't mention were all busts. Why couldn't we draft at least 2 of those guys that weren't busts and are actually good to very good players and were drafted close to our picks? 2014 we didn't miss on anyone in the 1st, but then we miss out on Point.

You are playing the cheery picking game which holds no value. Most are too lazy to to proper research.

Not sure if you seen this before cause I posted it several times but check out post 55 and 60 on this thread... Best Drafting Teams in the NHL. Laugh at it all you want but it's the same rules applied to all teams equally. It's about draft power vs results and you do get penalized for busts.... especially if you pick a top 10 bust! Oilers for example.. McDavid and Drai vs Yakupov and Puljujarvi for example.

I plan on updating it to include last season before next season starts. Got to spend some time to update a few things based on some new ideas too. This takes a lot time. More than your 10 min's of cherry picking.

The Main Point? This is 2020, not 2015 anymore! Habs are trending very well according to our draft power which was 10th highest from 16-19.

 

[DAChampion]

The Main Point? This is 2020, not 2015 anymore!

But we come to the Habs board to forget about that.

 

[The Great Weal]

You are playing the cheery picking game which holds no value. Most are too lazy to to proper research.

Not sure if you seen this before cause I posted it several times but check out post 55 and 60 on this thread... Best Drafting Teams in the NHL. Laugh at it all you want but it's the same rules applied to all teams equally. It's about draft power vs results and you do get penalized for busts.... especially if you pick a top 10 bust!

I plan on updating it to include last season before next season starts. Got to spend some time to update a few things based on some new ideas too. This takes a lot time. More than your 10 min's of cherry picking.

The Main Point? This is 2020, not 2015 anymore!

How is it cherry picking when I'm talking about successful picks drafted not long after ours? It is 2020, but our 2017 draft class doesn't seem like it's going to have a good player(top 6 forward/top 4 dman) unless Brook really turns it around. Nobody can talk about 2018 and 2019 since it is very early. 2016 was good because of Sergachev because as good as Mete is in the 4th round, it's not something you dance in the streets about.

 

[Whitesnake]

The Main Point? This is 2020, not 2015 anymore! Habs are trending very well according to our draft power which was 10th highest from 16-19.

Habs are trending very well.....based on numbers Sergachev got with Tampa. Got it. Sorry, I appreciate the effort. I really do. Geez, I would even say you might be right....but my projection sees the Habs trending well because of Romanov, Norlinder and maybe Caufield. Which obviously doesn't show on your graphic.

 

[The Great Weal]

@TooLegitToQuit I appreciate the work, but I unfortunately can't really be convinced by your work when for example in 2012-2015 we are supposedly better than the Sens. However, I would trade every single player we have drafted in that 4 year span for Thomas Chabot. Colin White would also be the 2nd best player drafted between those 2 teams during that time. Chabot alone should put the Sens ahead of us and White should put them even more ahead.

 

[Habs Halifax]

But we come to the Habs board to forget about that.

Some fans want blood! They live in the past

How is it cherry picking when I'm talking about successful picks drafted not long after ours? It is 2020, but our 2017 draft class doesn't seem like it's going to have a good player(top 6 forward/top 4 dman) unless Brook really turns it around. Nobody can talk about 2018 and 2019 since it is very early. 2016 was good because of Sergachev because as good as Mete is in the 4th round, it's not something you dance in the streets about.

You are cheering picking cause you have not put every team together in the hit/bust approach and what draft power they had. Randomly listing players like you just did don't give us a good picture.

Draft pool rankings is subjective to hype and bias opinion (future outlook) and I focus on draft power vs results. There is a trend where we are 10th in draft power (16-19) and 7th in rankings. Once again... same rules applies equally to all teams. So you can fight that logic all day long. Talk to me when you do some research on all teams and provide unbias research to report something of value.

 

[The Great Weal]

You are cheering picking cause you have not put every team together in the hit/bust approach and what draft power they had. Randomly listing players like you just did don't give us a good picture.

It is not random, I don't know why you keep saying that. Theodore being picked after McCarron has nothing to do with cherry picking.

 

[Habs Halifax]

It is not random, I don't know why you keep saying that.

It is random. You are looking at the Habs only and not every single team. Come on man.. I know you are smarter than that.

Come up with something where you apply the same rules to all teams equally? Spend some time on it and avoid being bias cause you are on a witch hunt to prove the Habs suck.

 

[Whitesnake]

You are cheering picking cause you have not put every team together in the hit/bust approach and what draft power they had. Randomly listing players like you just did don't give us a good picture.

Draft pool rankings is subjective to hype and bias opinion (future outlook) and I focus on draft power vs results. There is a trend where we are 10th in draft power (16-19) and 7th in rankings. Once again... same rules applies equally to all teams. So you can fight that logic all day long. Talk to me when you do some research on all teams and provide unbias research to report something of value.

Thing is...draft power doesn't say the whole story. Aside from the Sergachev-Tampa duo you don't analyse, some could even say that Timmins was badly judged in draft power in 12-13 based on the weakness of the teams. He had more draft power. But had not a lot to work with. Some will say that having 3 chances to pick a nickel out of a sea of nickels...is not the same has having 3 chances to pick a tooney out of a sea of tooneys....See..I'm also able to defend Trevor....

It is random. You are looking at the Habs only and not every single team. Come on man.. I know you are smarter than that.

Come up with something where you apply the same rules to all teams equally? Spend some time on it and avoid being bias cause you are on a witch hunt to prove the Habs suck.

Why do you keep disregarding the Sergachev situation? Have Boston trade McAvoy as good as the Bruins are. Or have Phoenix trade Chychrun to Tampa. And tell me how many more points do those guys have? What rank do the Habs have if Sergachev stays here and obviously gets less points?

'Cause the situation is that 99% of the top picks aren't traded 3-4 years after they are picked.

 

[The Great Weal]

It is random. You are looking at the Habs only and not every single team. Come on man.. I know you are smarter than that

Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part 6)

How's this for random? I haven't even updated it. 29th out of 30th. You can disagree with some names I put for every team, but you can't disagree with the crap results.

If no good players were drafted anywhere near our picks, then sure I'll excuse Timmins during weaker years. That hasn't been the case by the names I provided you.

 

[Habs Halifax]

@TooLegitToQuit I appreciate the work, but I unfortunately can't really be convinced by your work when for example in 2012-2015 we are supposedly better than the Sens. However, I would trade every single player we have drafted in that 4 year span for Thomas Chabot. Colin White would also be the 2nd best player drafted between those 2 teams during that time. Chabot alone should put the Sens ahead of us and White should put them even more ahead.

Chabot and White
vs
Galchenyuk & Lehkonen

The only reason why we are ahead of them is because Galchenyuk and Lehkonen came in earlier. How do you know see that? Over time, they will pass us. Sens are one of the best drafting teams in the NHL. You should look at larger sample sizes. The 4 year examples are just smaller zoomed in samples and it's not locked in place yet. Look at the Sens from 08-11. They killed it! 15th in draft power and their rating score is double from the Caps.

So basically, you think the 16-19 results from the Habs are too early and we will trend down from 7th as we move forward? Cause that's what happened before? I think I got your approach. You think the past = the future.

Thing is...draft power doesn't say the whole story. Aside from the Sergachev-Tampa duo you don't analyse, some could even say that Timmins was badly judged in draft power in 12-13 based on the weakness of the teams. He had more draft power. But had not a lot to work with. Some will say that having 3 chances to pick a nickel out of a sea of nickels...is not the same has having 3 chances to pick a tooney out of a sea of tooneys....See..I'm also able to defend Trevor....

I am on record saying multiple times that the 12-15 years were high draft power bottom of the NHL in results. Don't get caught up in a debate war and overlook what I am saying. The belittle ones are going to try to pin my down on something that I didn't say. Those posters can go pound sand!

The trends indicate we are on par of better according to our draft power from 16-19 drafts. It's early so yeah, I expect up/down movement. Are you on the pessimistic side where you think the past = the future? Our draft power ranking of 10th is going to result in what when we look back and have a larger sample size? Stick your neck out and make a prediction? Right now we are 7th. In lets say 3-5 years, where are we? You willing to make a prediction?

Timmins should have been fired in 2015. But he wasn't. It's time to move past that. It's 2020 now and firing him now is dumb.