Trevor Timmins Discussion Part III

[Mrb1p]

this is BS.... You're lucky or not. Injuries can happen to anyone at anytime.

I dont even know why youre quoting me

 

[Mrb1p]

2008-2012... FIVE drafts.... How many Timmins' picks are still playing in Montreal ? TWO: Gally and Hudon.....

And whats the point?

I dont even know what youre trying to debate.

 

[1909]

And whats the point?

I dont even know what youre trying to debate.

Timmins sainthood.... He failed more often than he succeeded over long periods of time.

 

[Mrb1p]

Timmins sainthood.... He failed more often than he succeeded over long periods of time.

Thats usually how scouting and drafting goes, yes. The turn over rate is rarely postive, it just has to be better than the majority, which he is.

 

[montreal]

McDonagh and Sergachev were very easy picks to make....

That is bull shit. I remember the '07 draft very well, I was told way early in the season that Timmins was really high on McDonagh who was playing for CDH in the USHS. So I watched him play and was very impressed but you are talking about a HS kid so there is higher risk since he's playing against younger players and weaker comp then CHLers or even the USHL where he would face older players. There is no way McDonagh was a easy pick, the Habs liked him so much they tried to trade up but no team would bite. It's not like some around here and in the media weren't saying they had to take Espo there and look how that would have turned out.

In '16 they did get lucky that the OHL defensemen of the year fell to them but they easily could have picked a center instead. Jost, Brown, McLeod all went in the next 3 picks.

Timmins has been money when picking inside the top 15 aside from Kostitsyn who some liked and others didn't. If it wasn't one of the best draft classes ever it wouldn't look that bad but he was his first draft as head scout.

 

[Redux91]

2008-2012... FIVE drafts.... How many Timmins' picks are still playing in Montreal ? TWO: Gally and Hudon.....

Id honestly love to see you use that exercise with 30 other NHL teams head of amateur scouting. hell, just do it with 10 teams

 

[Redux91]

Timmins sainthood.... He failed more often than he succeeded over long periods of time.

Again not a great analogy when it comes to scouting and drafting... that is not a world where people are batting 1.000 100% of the time, in fact nobody does or ever has

just like in baseball... 1 out of 3 is considered an amazing achievement, thats kind of the mindset one should use when looking at head of amateur scouting, the batting averages are probably in the .250 to .300 range as opposed to the .750 - .800 range youre probably thinking about

so its easy to single out only ONE person youve ever been paying attention to, bat .275 or whatever which is not that bad in the context of it all, but out of context, its alarming, and its alarming you.

Timmins has done a fine job with the hits and misses included, its really more management and player development that has damaged us over the years... and timmins is always adamant that they SCOUT and DRAFT the players, ..then they send them on to the development team and thats it, thats where their process ends

I had no idea who Brook was at the draft, but they sure as hell found something in him

 

[Miller Time]

Timmins sainthood.... He failed more often than he succeeded over long periods of time.

Your assessment is far too shallow...

#of picks & placing of picks, then compared to rest of the league, is necessary to ground it.

I believe it's already been well established that by NHL games standard, Timmins for his career is in the upper echelon of NHL draft effectiveness.

Try again.

 

[No fan fiction]

agreed, have been saying for some time that things would at least look a little better in regards to development and drafting if not for Lefebvre who just made some really strange decisions that imo were not a good way to develop talent. That said of course it could have been just all those players were bad picks and the blame is all on them and or Timmins and his staff but I never believed that. The main point for me was always Leblanc as I just never understood how anyone that watched him as a 20 year old rookie in Hamilton, that saw him play so well where he clearly was one of the best players on the team and then the next year in Lefebvre's first season he ends up in the coaches doghouse is removed from the top line and PP and over time just looks the complete opposite of the player he was in his first year.

Now you can say a lot of things here. Yes maybe the Habs shouldn't have called him that year, leave him to play a full year in the AHL ala Subban. Yes the player has to take some the blame, maybe he didn't have the mental makeup, or couldn't get the proper strength. And I've said everyone involved shares some blame, Timmins went with a local kid that didn't have the best skating.

At the end of the day though, my whole thought was how do you look at the kid that was playing so well under one coach and then the new coach his game was night and day and he looked like ****. Injuries, call ups, maybe he peaked at 20, lots of reasons but I just don't know how anyone that watched him in Hamilton those years couldn't at least point the finger at Lefebvre and say he's got to take some of the blame and imo a big part of it. Not all but a good bit of it imo.

But after 6 freaking long years he's gone and now we just have to move forward and hope that the new coaching staff can do a better job although I still think if we continue to rush these kids it won't help matters all that much.

As for the season I don't think we'll see both Mete/Juulsen down but I guess we'll see. Kotka, Scherbak, DLR, I think Kotka either says in the NHL or goes to Liiga but we'll see how the next 6 games for him. Scherbak I would be surprised if he cleared waivers. Not looking at other teams rosters but if i'm say NYR or maybe Yotes, why not take a flyer on him for free especially if you don't care about this season and put him with someone that can snipe his sick passes. DLR perhaps they will send him down if they can't trade anyone, clearly someone is going to be going somewhere in the next week or two.

Brook like Suzuki I expect to be traded to a contender so we'll see when their seasons end. Poehling could still be playing hockey in April depending on how his team does, they should be a lock for the tournament at the end of March so if they advance that will be April 11th to 13th.

Still on about Leblanc? Tinordi? Why not Beaulieu? Simply put, those were not Bergevin's draft choices. More than that, Leblanc's 2nd yr in Hamilton was wasted with a really bad injury in a really stupid fight with Jesse Blacker (I was at that game), which was only the next in series of questionable choices made by each of those 3 first round choices of the previous regime. As much as people go on about Leblanc being drafted b/c he was a local boy, he was drafted at more or less his draft position. The truth is, the player drafted on the basis of his name was Tinordi. The 2009 draft was not a great draft class (Scott Glennie?) and even Brayden Schenn took 7 yrs and a new team to become even a 70pt/yr centre in the NHL. Detroit's geniuses drafted Landon Ferraro instead of Ryan O'Reilly (who was passed over by every team).

System depth is the last thing to evolve in a management transition and a retool. It takes 5 yrs (per the scouts with whom I used to sit at Copps) and an AHL team (also per scouts) will usually only have 4-5 prospects. The rest are depth, hopefuls, and bodies to make the locals happy--see Scott Darling. Hamilton had the likes of Ryan Risidore and Joe Seroski. They were never going to be prospects, let alone in the NHL but were local boys . . . Even the Calder Cup champion team had 6-7 NHL players on it, including Price (who was sent there as an insult to Hamiltonians per the Spectator at the time) and that was a combined team with Dallas! The 2009-10 team, semi-finalists, coached by the infallible Guy Boucher, had about the same, and that includes 4th liners and journeymen like Pyatt & White, and a guy like Benoit who went through waivers more than once and hung around, along with Subban, who was only sent down for the last series and was terrible in the deciding 7th game, along with Boucher. In short, those were winning teams and failed to produce any actual stars. Price and Subban barely played for those teams EXCEPT for the playoffs. The leading scorers were luminaries like Locke, Milroy, Desharnais . . .

Moral of the story is that players who came up were ready to play and played the system that was employed. The team--the only team that matters--changed systems this year. My guess is that the AHL team is about 2 yrs behind its depth and development cycle. I think that's down to many and several factors including and especially Timmins' drafting especially the three drafts before Bergevin took over and the three drafts after Bergevin took over, but of course it's all Lefebvre's fault in mod logic.

 

[Chili]

Still on about Leblanc? Tinordi? Why not Beaulieu? Simply put, those were not Bergevin's draft choices. More than that, Leblanc's 2nd yr in Hamilton was wasted with a really bad injury in a really stupid fight with Jesse Blacker (I was at that game), which was only the next in series of questionable choices made by each of those 3 first round choices of the previous regime. As much as people go on about Leblanc being drafted b/c he was a local boy, he was drafted at more or less his draft position. The truth is, the player drafted on the basis of his name was Tinordi. The 2009 draft was not a great draft class (Scott Glennie?) and even Brayden Schenn took 7 yrs and a new team to become even a 70pt/yr centre in the NHL. Detroit's geniuses drafted Landon Ferraro instead of Ryan O'Reilly (who was passed over by every team).

System depth is the last thing to evolve in a management transition and a retool. It takes 5 yrs (per the scouts with whom I used to sit at Copps) and an AHL team (also per scouts) will usually only have 4-5 prospects. The rest are depth, hopefuls, and bodies to make the locals happy--see Scott Darling. Hamilton had the likes of Ryan Risidore and Joe Seroski. They were never going to be prospects, let alone in the NHL but were local boys . . . Even the Calder Cup champion team had 6-7 NHL players on it, including Price (who was sent there as an insult to Hamiltonians per the Spectator at the time) and that was a combined team with Dallas! The 2009-10 team, semi-finalists, coached by the infallible Guy Boucher, had about the same, and that includes 4th liners and journeymen like Pyatt & White, and a guy like Benoit who went through waivers more than once and hung around, along with Subban, who was only sent down for the last series and was terrible in the deciding 7th game, along with Boucher. In short, those were winning teams and failed to produce any actual stars. Price and Subban barely played for those teams EXCEPT for the playoffs. The leading scorers were luminaries like Locke, Milroy, Desharnais . . .

Moral of the story is that players who came up were ready to play and played the system that was employed. The team--the only team that matters--changed systems this year. My guess is that the AHL team is about 2 yrs behind its depth and development cycle. I think that's down to many and several factors including and especially Timmins' drafting especially the three drafts before Bergevin took over and the three drafts after Bergevin took over, but of course it's all Lefebvre's fault in mod logic.

Along those lines in the Friday night AHL game, the Devils 20 players were made up 17 of their draft picks and original free agent signees, compared with 11 for the Habs (only 6 drafted players by my count). The only 3 Devils players who had played in other organizations were Eric Tangradi and Brian Strait (two players Ray Shero had in Pittsburgh) plus John Ramage. How many current Rocket have NHL futures? Maybe when it's easy to point to several Habs draft picks on the team who show they have an NHL future the organization will have started to turn a corner.

 

[Whitesnake]

I keep hearing how games played or points are what demonstrate if a scouting group is good or bad. And what was used to demonstrate that overall from 03 to 14 or 15 or whatever....that Timmins was amongst the best. Thing is....you need other ways to prove that 'cause strangely, the only reason why Timmins is so great in the end is mostly due to 1 incredible season. 1. Out of 13 seasons. I didn't count 2017 and 2018 obviously....and even 2016 and below, it could change....but there are so numbers out there for those seasons. But if you take the scouting group performances every single year....you find out that:

In 2003: Habs scouting group are 12th in games played; 21 in points
2004: 2 in games played, 6 in points
2005: 5 in games played, 12 in points (understandable since Price is a goalie...)
2006: 24 in games played, 25 in points
2007: 1 in games played, 1 in points
2008: 30 in games played, 30 in points
2009: 26 in games played, 27 in points
2010: 18 in games played, 16 in points
2011: 25 in games played, 24 in points
2012: 13 in games played, 3 in points
2013: 6 in games played, 12 in points
2014: 26 in games played, 26 in points
2015: 20 in games played, 21 in points

It might improve a lot based on 2016, 2017 and 2018...but it's too soon to be analysed.

And for whoever are going to bring me the well you need to take into account the ranks teams pick....and the number of picks....well sure. But if you do so, you have to do so for EVERY freakin team out there. The same people who say that to excuse Timmins, will NEVER bring the fact that the Rangers were out of 1st rounders for 4 years in a row. That for people who bring for example the low number of picks that 2008 and it explains why we couldn'T hit any homerun, that you could look at the Boston Bruins draft of 2014 and even if you remove Pastrnak, you still have Donato, Heinen and Bjork out of 5 overall picks they had that year.

At the very best....or at the very worst, the conclusion is that there are just NO way to know for sure if a guy was great or bad. If you go with games played, which for me is stupid, well you see that on a 13-year span, Timmins was great 4 years out of those 13 years. In points...well the same number of years and I count 2005 as not having points because of Price is stupid too.

I just think that at one point.....you need a fresh look on things. There are great success stories on almost every other team. You probably can find 1 guy per team who is not a head scout who could very well be. I just find strange the way he is analyzed. Excused from 08-11 'cause he had no picks to work with...but praised like a god because of 2007....while not mentioning that this year was not the norm either. You need to do the most with what you have. He did in 2007. He didn't from 08-11. But the numbers I did from 03 to 13 do not show that it's mostly a Lefebvre thing....a Bergevin thing or whatever. Timmins and group had good and bad years NO MATTER who was coaching the farm team or was managing the pro team.

 

[montreal]

Was looking up the USHL to see how Henrikson was doing when I saw that Casey Staum was 1 pt behind the league leaders in points for defensemen. Glad he's finally healthy at least, I know the Habs let him go but i hope him and Henrikson can get spots on NCAA teams next year. Maybe Henrikson can take Koberstein's spot at Alaska as they usually have older players that aren't highly scouted.

 

[Whitesnake]

We will see soon if Timmins was right with his out of left field pick in Lukas Vejdemo or.....the guy next door in Nicolas Roy. Roy was just called back with the Canes. Again, out of left field picks from Timmins always if not very often stay....out of left field. Keep it simple Trevor.

For the record, 'cause somehow we are judged more harshly than the professionnals that are actually doing the job, I wanted NOTHING to do with Roy in the first 2 rounds. I hated how lazy he looked most of the time. But 3rd round? That's the kind of package you should aim for. Instead of unknown guys that stays unknown as it's the history of Timmins. But we will see. While it seems Vejdemo is looking fine....needless to say Roy look much better.

 

[1909]

We will see soon if Timmins was right with his out of left field pick in Lukas Vejdemo or.....the guy next door in Nicolas Roy. Roy was just called back with the Canes. Again, out of left field picks from Timmins always if not very often stay....out of left field. Keep it simple Trevor.

For the record, 'cause somehow we are judged more harshly than the professionnals that are actually doing the job, I wanted NOTHING to do with Roy in the first 2 rounds. I hated how lazy he looked most of the time. But 3rd round? That's the kind of package you should aim for. Instead of unknown guys that stays unknown as it's the history of Timmins. But we will see. While it seems Vejdemo is looking fine....needless to say Roy look much better.

Roy is exactly the type of big RH centerman that the Habs need. I am looking forward now to see if Ikonen will develop. There is a guy named Antoine Morand that was picked shortly after by Anaheim and he is doing very well in the Q so far. I would had liked the Habs to make an effort to trade up for Comtois but... And I prefer to forget the Crisp over Duclair pick few years ago.

 

[DAChampion]

It is valuable for people to acknowledge when they were wrong.

So on that note, @TooLegitToQuit, you were probably right, and I was probably wrong, in our relative assessments of the Habs farm system during the past year. There are a lot of prospects and young players showing good progression, among them Brook, Fleury, McCarron, never mind the ones who were drafted in 2018, as well as Suzuki.

The farm system does in fact look better than it has been on average for most of the past two decades. The odds of the Habs having a deep core once their next window opens, as well as having sufficient assets to make trades from a position of strength, are high.

 

[Habs Halifax]

It is valuable for people to acknowledge when they were wrong.

So on that note, @TooLegitToQuit, you were probably right, and I was probably wrong, in our relative assessments of the Habs farm system during the past year. There are a lot of prospects and young players showing good progression, among them Brook, Fleury, McCarron, never mind the ones who were drafted in 2018, as well as Suzuki.

The farm system does in fact look better than it has been on average for most of the past two decades. The odds of the Habs having a deep core once their next window opens, as well as having sufficient assets to make trades from a position of strength, are high.

I was on the Habs prospect bandwagon before the last draft. So I don't get credit for the last draft and how this makes it look even better. The biggest arguments was about me standing firm that we were a middle of the pack team in prospect rankings, not near dead last where most thought we were. Why did I think this? It came down to probability and I talked about this time and time again. Night and day difference between the amount of top 100 picks between 2008-2011 vs 2012+. I think our fan base was down on our ability to draft and develop based on the impacts of only Gallagher & Beaulieu from 4 years of drafting. It takes years to recover from only 8 top 100 picks in 4 years of drafting. What was the answer I got? Well the 2007 draft makes up for it. In a way it does cause it was an awesome draft year but it don't excuse us from going on a terrible 4 year span right after it. Those 4 years had major ripple effects in our ability to improve on the core we had.

I've studied the results on top 10 picks, top 100 picks and how this translates into production in the NHL. There are always exceptions to the rule but the trend/rule says the teams that draft well have a lot of top 100 picks and a few hits with their top 10 picks. It's not rocket science, the more darts you have, the more chance at hitting on your targets. 12 top 100 picks in the last 2 drafts. It's a big deal! There will be surprises and disappointments but we will hit on some targets. It comes down to probability and TT is good at what he does.

Thanks for acknowledging this. We are all right and wrong at times. I'm ashamed on how I defended the Alzner signing. Guess I fell into the defend Bergevin trap. At the time I did value the reliability part of a top 4D and I thought Alzner would fit well with Petry. But I didn't predict or know Alzner has terrible vision as a hockey player

 

[montreal]

It is valuable for people to acknowledge when they were wrong.

So on that note, @TooLegitToQuit, you were probably right, and I was probably wrong, in our relative assessments of the Habs farm system during the past year. There are a lot of prospects and young players showing good progression, among them Brook, Fleury, McCarron, never mind the ones who were drafted in 2018, as well as Suzuki.

The farm system does in fact look better than it has been on average for most of the past two decades. The odds of the Habs having a deep core once their next window opens, as well as having sufficient assets to make trades from a position of strength, are high.

It's just way too early to say this. I've been closely following the Habs prospects for about 20 years. So far there's no right or wrong when it's so early in a very long season.

I think we have a really good top 4 in Kotka, Suzuki, Brook and Poehling. After that there are a lot of question marks. Fleury is off to a good start, Harris has really surprised me, Romanov I still really struggle with but he's getting great experience. Ylonen I won't get to see but hopefully he picks it up. Primeau wasn't at his best this past weekend after a strong series the previous week vs a very weak team. Olofsson is off to a good start but I still wonder if we should have picked his former linemate.

The CHL kids you have Fonstand gets off to a great start but then just 1 pt in his last 7, and 4 pts in last 11 games. Hillis I only saw once and he did play a good game but 1 pt in 9 games. McShane has 5 pts in 2 games, the rest he has 3 pts in 7 games. Houde has 5 pts in 2 games, 7 pts in 11 games so not as bad. Stapley looks quick and skilled, he's in a really good spot to put up points. He's the 3rd 19 year old from the draft (Ylonen is a late B-day, Gornaik and Stapley were passed over in '17)

So far perhaps the biggest surprise is McCarron, while I'm not ready to say he's a success, he has been one of Laval's best players and does look quicker. If he can continue to build off what he's doing then perhaps he'll be a 4th liner or spare forward next year. I have said I think he will be a 4th liner in time as a forward his size is logically going to take longer and with the shit development he got it certainly didn't do him any favors. I bet he's much happier not having ECHL linemates this year.

 

[Agalloch]

Koberstein was his usual physical self, took a penalty for elbowing a kid along the boards, but he's big and the kid was smaller so i don't think he meant it as he didn't seem to have any clue it was called on him. That said he's on such a bad team and seems like a long shot to get a contract. Likely the last time I will see him play.

Such a bad pick... this guy shouldn't have been drafted at all.

 

[Legend123]

Such a bad pick... this guy shouldn't have been drafted at all.

I will never understand why teams go for depth players with no skills in later rounds as if they cant sign them on the open market or just make a simple trade using a 3rd round pick or lower.
Evey team should aim for the sky with all of their picks regardless of size, attitude or russiannes. Who cares who he is as long as hes good, right? Well asides Bergevin and his insanity towards Subban.

 

[montreal]

Such a bad pick... this guy shouldn't have been drafted at all.

yea I hope whoever thought it was a good idea was fired, when Bjork was there and coming off a good year with the USNDTP they opted for some obscure player from a league they rarely draft from going to a very weak program in the NCAA. That said he does have a good physical game and he's solid defensively. I think he'll be a good ECHLer and maybe a decent AHLer in time.

 

[Agalloch]

yea I hope whoever thought it was a good idea was fired, when Bjork was there and coming off a good year with the USNDTP they opted for some obscure player from a league they rarely draft from going to a very weak program in the NCAA. That said he does have a good physical game and he's solid defensively. I think he'll be a good ECHLer and maybe a decent AHLer in time.

Along our recent ECHLers Pezzetta, M. Bradley, Fucale, Crisp, Thrower, Vail... (all draft picks since Bergevin took over).

Audette, S. Bourque and Addison should have played in ECHL too.

 

[Legend123]

It's just way too early to say this. I've been closely following the Habs prospects for about 20 years. So far there's no right or wrong when it's so early in a very long season.

I think we have a really good top 4 in Kotka, Suzuki, Brook and Poehling. After that there are a lot of question marks. Fleury is off to a good start, Harris has really surprised me, Romanov I still really struggle with but he's getting great experience. Ylonen I won't get to see but hopefully he picks it up. Primeau wasn't at his best this past weekend after a strong series the previous week vs a very weak team. Olofsson is off to a good start but I still wonder if we should have picked his former linemate.

The CHL kids you have Fonstand gets off to a great start but then just 1 pt in his last 7, and 4 pts in last 11 games. Hillis I only saw once and he did play a good game but 1 pt in 9 games. McShane has 5 pts in 2 games, the rest he has 3 pts in 7 games. Houde has 5 pts in 2 games, 7 pts in 11 games so not as bad. Stapley looks quick and skilled, he's in a really good spot to put up points. He's the 3rd 19 year old from the draft (Ylonen is a late B-day, Gornaik and Stapley were passed over in '17)

So far perhaps the biggest surprise is McCarron, while I'm not ready to say he's a success, he has been one of Laval's best players and does look quicker. If he can continue to build off what he's doing then perhaps he'll be a 4th liner or spare forward next year. I have said I think he will be a 4th liner in time as a forward his size is logically going to take longer and with the **** development he got it certainly didn't do him any favors. I bet he's much happier not having ECHL linemates this year.

Who does Brook remind you of?
I think he is very similar to Rielly of the leafs. Dominant when he has the puck like Rielly with amazing skating ability. Or am I way off?

As for the CHL kids, have u seen them on many occasions and if so, do u think they have been struggling or dominant but just unlucky? Do you think any of them will be over a PPG? I'm very concerned about Hillis. We used up a very high pick (relative to Fonstad, Harris and McShane) and seems to be struggling badly. I'm just stat watching so I won't pretend to know what's going on with him.

 

[montreal]

Along our recent ECHLers Pezzetta, M. Bradley, Fucale, Crisp, Thrower, Vail... (all draft picks since Bergevin took over).

Audette, S. Bourque and Addison should have played in ECHL too.

well if Audette's dad didn't work for us I wonder if he's still a pick. Addison was injured all last year and then came back for the last 6 games of the season, but they had stopped sending players to Brampton early on in the year aside from Fucale who they clearly didn't care about. Perhaps he'll be in the ECHL this year as I believe Pezzetta was injured so now he's healthy they sent him down, perhaps they do the same with Addison if he's been injured all this time.

Who does Brook remind you of?
I think he is very similar to Rielly of the leafs. Dominant when he has the puck like Rielly with amazing skating ability. Or am I way off?

As for the CHL kids, have u seen them on many occasions and if so, do u think they have been struggling or dominant but just unlucky? Do you think any of them will be over a PPG? I'm very concerned about Hillis. We used up a very high pick (relative to Fonstad, Harris and McShane) and seems to be struggling badly. I'm just stat watching so I won't pretend to know what's going on with him.

not sure who Brook reminds me of, he's great at rushing the puck and I think that's going to be a big part of his game. He's just so smooth out there.

I've seen all the CHL kids play this year except the WHL guys, have seen all the CHL kids play at least a 3 or 4 games overall. I thought Hillis played well so I can't say why he's struggling, I was impressed with Fonstad in the playoffs last year so not sure what's going on there. McShane and Houde I haven't been impressed with and Teasdale I like his speed but we'll see what he does next year.

 

[Toene]

TOP 100 PICKS. NOT TOP 101, NOT TOP 99! TOP 100!

 

[Whitesnake]

yea I hope whoever thought it was a good idea was fired, when Bjork was there and coming off a good year with the USNDTP they opted for some obscure player from a league they rarely draft from going to a very weak program in the NCAA. That said he does have a good physical game and he's solid defensively. I think he'll be a good ECHLer and maybe a decent AHLer in time.

Yeah Bjork....or Sam Blais. At one point, somebody should step up and based on history say ''When we think we are overdoing it...it's because we do'' Keep it freakin simple. Our out of left field picks do not pan out. Incredibly enough, what pans out are the CLEAR BPA that falls...see Gallagher. See Mete. See even Hudon no matter how he finishes his career. Those are the ones that will most likely pan out. Not the mysterious guys. We don't have the eye for that. And If Primeau pans out, the kid cannot be seen as a out of left field pick. In goal magazine had him as a goalie to watch prior to the draft season. Primeau fits more the bill of BPA in the 7th round than a WTF pick.