Trevor Timmins Discussion Part III

[cactusjack]

What I'd like to see, and that MB can see, is Timmins draft list. So much easier to judge his work with a complete list and not just the players he drafted and that they developped. For keeping his job for so long, I guess his record is pretty impressive isn't it?

 

[1909]

Why Ikonen over Morand ?

 

[montreal]

I have been a big supporter of Timmins and I have said for some time now when fans were saying he needs to be fired that for me he's further down the list of problems and that MB, Lefebvre, Molson, CJ and cleaning up both sides of the scouting before firing Timmins. So far we got one of those, I'm still holding out hope that at some point Molson steps aside and hires a real president and that president hopefully fires MB and replaces him and then hopefully that new GM fires CJ and promotes Ducharme to head coach.

Once all of them are gone then the new GM needs to take a hard look at things and if he opts to fire Timmins then so be it. But I still think all things considered he's at least top 10, if Scherbak busts and the '17/'18 drafts don't go so well then I'll have to re-think that as long as the draft classes turn out well but not for us.

 

[Whitesnake]

Yes he was look at this video you can see that TT is running the show

And people still want to pretend that Bergevin and/or Churla runs it. Insane. There's a proof right there.

 

[montreal]

And people still want to pretend that Bergevin and/or Churla runs it. Insane. There's a proof right there.

But can you say how much impact Bergevin and Churla have on the draft? When Timmins said they made a mistake in '13 going for size, do you think he was talking about him alone or did the fact that it was Churla's first year with us play a part in that?

 

[Whitesnake]

A couple years ago there was a data table going around in various forms that showed Timmins as one of the better head scouts.

You'll strengthen your point if you can produce a similar table that demonstrates Timmims is one of the worse.

If the highlighted part is true than forget about changing Timmins for another peer. No head scout can fill the demands you're putting on the position. Besides, since this past February MB has shown that to be untrue. We acquired Domi, Reilly, Tatar, Suzuki and Armia. Maybe instead of trying to get superman for the head scouting position, we should instead be more demanding of our GMs.

The table that had Montreal as THE best team in scouting relies on 2 things. From 2003 to 2015. And games played per pick. First, I always said that Timmins was great from 03 to 07, it's after that that there's a problem. His other table shows that Timmins shines at finding late round gems...his examples? SKostitsyn, Halak and STreit. What years were they pick again? Then he talks about points per pick and place the Habs 8th, saying that it's pretty good since we didn't have a lot top 1st round picks. True. Yet, in his example, because Boston is 2nd, he says this "If you remove guys like Crosby, Ovechking, Malkin and...Bergeron", Habs would be better than 8th. Why in the world do you have to remove Bergeron? Isn't that the proof that Boston made an awesome pick? Bergeron wasn't top 5 wasn't he? As far as us being 8th....again....it's all related of us having very good draft from 03 to 07, something I've never contested. But to be a good team, you can't sleep on 2 or 3 great drafts 11 years ago. That won't cut it if you want to renew yourself. Especially in a cap era.

By the way, yep, the highlighted part is true and especially based on the examples you gave? 'Cause Domi, Tatar, Suzuki and Armia are DIRECTLY related to the draft picks we made.....Namely Galchenyuk and Pacioretty.

 

[Whitesnake]

But can you say how much impact Bergevin and Churla have on the draft? When Timmins said they made a mistake in '13 going for size, do you think he was talking about him alone or did the fact that it was Churla's first year with us play a part in that?

While Timmins do seem to have a tendancy to only talks about his great moments....yep, I would think that he blames himself as well. Why in the world would a 1st year Churla have more to say than a 9th year Timmins?

 

[montreal]

While Timmins do seem to have a tendancy to only talks about his great moments....yep, I would think that he blames himself as well. Why in the world would a 1st year Churla have more to say than a 9th year Timmins?

I never said more say though, but you don't think it's a bit odd in his first year that a former NHLer that was known as a tough guy with size and that year we pick several big guys? Or was it just coincidence? People say MB loves his low talent hard working grinders, 4th liners/bottom pairing D's cause that's what he was in the NHL. Wouldn't the same logic apply to Churla?

 

[Whitesnake]

Because I assume the quality of draft classes vary from year to year? And I was addressing your specific examples.

I'm kind of confused about your issue. Is your issue that Montreal picks too few Q players and too many US players? Or that they don't draft well enough. Because I don't really see the fact that they're picking players from the Q in the 5th-6th round instead of a 3rd-4th round as being that big an issue. Get better scouts and recruitment in the Q, obviously, but I'm not familiar with what the turnover in that area has been.

Habs haven't been good enough lately overall. And Montreal have dissed the Q because of how the league is weaker than the others. But my point is that weaker doesn't mean without any talent. And you add the fact that a lot of teams don't draft Q players, means that there's a greater pool for you.

 

[Whitesnake]

I never said more say though, but you don't think it's a bit odd in his first year that a former NHLer that was known as a tough guy with size and that year we pick several big guys? Or was it just coincidence? People say MB loves his low talent hard working grinders, 4th liners/bottom pairing D's cause that's what he was in the NHL. Wouldn't the same logic apply to Churla?

2013 saw McCarron, DLR and Crisp picked as big guys. Yet, 2010 saw Tinordi being picked and Churla wasn't around. Qualier and Missiaen in 2008. Fischer in 2006, Timmins can love big guys too.

Personnally, I don't think DLR was that bad of a pick. Wasn't picked because he was big, was picked because he could have developpe an offensive game and he was a centerman. Obviously, the size didn't hurt. But yes, McCArron and Crisp were pick because of how big they were. Thing for me though is that if Timmins is intelligent as I think he is, if he thinks he has a bad apples who presses the wrong button, he'll remove him. But it's tough to fire a guy when you actually agreed with him. Personnally, I will always choose to believe that Timmins is fine with any picks we make.

 

[Chili]

Delete]

 

[Habs Icing]

The table that had Montreal as THE best team in scouting relies on 2 things. From 2003 to 2015. And games played per pick. First, I always said that Timmins was great from 03 to 07, it's after that that there's a problem. His other table shows that Timmins shines at finding late round gems...his examples? SKostitsyn, Halak and STreit. What years were they pick again? Then he talks about points per pick and place the Habs 8th, saying that it's pretty good since we didn't have a lot top 1st round picks. True. Yet, in his example, because Boston is 2nd, he says this "If you remove guys like Crosby, Ovechking, Malkin and...Bergeron", Habs would be better than 8th. Why in the world do you have to remove Bergeron? Isn't that the proof that Boston made an awesome pick? Bergeron wasn't top 5 wasn't he? As far as us being 8th....again....it's all related of us having very good draft from 03 to 07, something I've never contested. But to be a good team, you can't sleep on 2 or 3 great drafts 11 years ago. That won't cut it if you want to renew yourself. Especially in a cap era.

By the way, yep, the highlighted part is true and especially based on the examples you gave? 'Cause Domi, Tatar, Suzuki and Armia are DIRECTLY related to the draft picks we made.....Namely Galchenyuk and Pacioretty.

2003-2015? What do you want to see from the picks in 2016-2017-2018? A little too early.

You conveniently forgot Gallagher. A late pick and drafted recently.

If the scouting staff hit on an average of two picks a year that's great. In 5 years that means 10 players are replaced. I doubt very many teams have that success rate.

And no about the highlighted part. A scouting team can bring talent into a team and you can have a brain dead GM trade them away for lessor talent i.e Sergachev for Drouin, Forsberg for Erat.

 

[montreal]

2013 saw McCarron, DLR and Crisp picked as big guys. Yet, 2010 saw Tinordi being picked and Churla wasn't around. Qualier and Missiaen in 2008. Fischer in 2006, Timmins can love big guys too.

Personnally, I don't think DLR was that bad of a pick. Wasn't picked because he was big, was picked because he could have developpe an offensive game and he was a centerman. Obviously, the size didn't hurt. But yes, McCArron and Crisp were pick because of how big they were. Thing for me though is that if Timmins is intelligent as I think he is, if he thinks he has a bad apples who presses the wrong button, he'll remove him. But it's tough to fire a guy when you actually agreed with him. Personnally, I will always choose to believe that Timmins is fine with any picks we make.

But Timmins didn't come out and say other years they made a mistake taking size, he just said '13 which just happens to be the first year Churla was here. Tinordi was just one pick, Fischer wasn't big just tall, clearly Timmins can pick big guys other times, but why said he made a mistake doing it in '13? So clearly McCarron, Crisp, DLR were picked for a reason and it was a mistake in hindsight according to Timmins. The question then becomes why he felt the need to do that, or was MB/Churla pushing for it and he went along? We can't know but I'm not a big fan of coincidence.

 

[dcal64]

Habs haven't been good enough lately overall. And Montreal have dissed the Q because of how the league is weaker than the others. But my point is that weaker doesn't mean without any talent. And you add the fact that a lot of teams don't draft Q players, means that there's a greater pool for you.

No, the reason fewer teams pick players from the Q is because the pool is small. Name me one team that doesn't draft players from the Q.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Habs haven't been good enough lately overall. And Montreal have dissed the Q because of how the league is weaker than the others. But my point is that weaker doesn't mean without any talent. And you add the fact that a lot of teams don't draft Q players, means that there's a greater pool for you.

The question is not about the Q not having talent, but of the consequence of lesser talent, making it more hit or miss because it's harder to quantify performance and extrapolate it to the future. It's riskier. Hockey Quebec is to blame. Not Timmins.

 

[Andrei79]

The question is not about the Q not having talent, but of the consequence of lesser talent, making it more hit or miss because it's harder to quantify performance and extrapolate it to the future. It's riskier. Hockey Quebec is to blame. Not Timmins.

Wouldn't that be true of high school and junior A players though ? Even the MHL. It didn't stop Timmins from drafting 4 players out of those leagues last year. His first pick in 2007 was a major hit, yet a D coming out of high school. He was pretty confident about him too, so we know he managed to evaluate talent in weaker leagues both in the past and now.

 

[Whitesnake]

No, the reason fewer teams pick players from the Q is because the pool is small. Name me one team that doesn't draft players from the Q.

Who said 0? Yet, Sabres last Q pick? 2014. Since then, they picked 33 players. Leafs...4 picks since 2009. Caps...1 pick since 2010. Pens, 3 picks since 2010. Isles 5 picks since 2010 etc. Some do way more. STrangely, the pool is big for some...but less big for others? Isn't that the same pool?

 

[dcal64]

Who said 0? Yet, Sabres last Q pick? 2014. Since then, they picked 33 players. Leafs...4 picks since 2009. Caps...1 pick since 2010. Pens, 3 picks since 2010. Isles 5 picks since 2010 etc. Some do way more. STrangely, the pool is big for some...but less big for others? Isn't that the same pool?

You said "Teams don't draft Q players", now you change it to they don't draft more than 1 player?

It's where players fall on your draft list, the Habs didn't draft Q players some years because they were picked before they had a chance to draft them, are you saying the Habs don't draft Q players on purpose?

The same applies to other teams, you draft according to your list, it's just that more players are from outside the Q are available, so naturally you will draft more non Q players. The Habs have drafted more Finns than Q players the last 2 drafts, are you saying the Habs prioritize Finns over Q players?

 

[Prospector]

Nice article in LaPresse plus with Trevor Timmins :
Trevor Timmins bien en selle - La Presse+

He is surprised by KK success. Says that Ylonen could be a hidden gem. Also says he is a bit disappointed by the production of some of our CHL prospects. A great read overall!

 

[No fan fiction]

I never said more say though, but you don't think it's a bit odd in his first year that a former NHLer that was known as a tough guy with size and that year we pick several big guys? Or was it just coincidence? People say MB loves his low talent hard working grinders, 4th liners/bottom pairing D's cause that's what he was in the NHL. Wouldn't the same logic apply to Churla?

that's not logic. that's textbook enthymeme.
by that same logic, why in the world would timmins stay in his role if he were constantly being overruled by new tough guys and low talent hard working grinders?
also by that same logic, if you had to play in the league to know anything about the league, then wouldn't we take bergevin or churla's word over a 5'7" body builder?
the one thing that is for sure is that you decided lefebvre was the biggest problem and you're kind of stuck now that the talent wave and new coaching wave that you had built up is now proving to be the worst farm team in 20 yrs.

 

[montreal]

''Developmental league'' for players that can't hack it in the NHL. If Mete is a NHL player, he should be developing in the NHL. It's not gonna help Mete to weave through AHL scrubs for his NHL skills. Offensive game in the AHL is a whole different thing than the NHL's offensive game. And anyways, regardless if he is in NHL/AHL, a very minimal portion of a player's skill is acquired through a game. Mete and every pro player has hours of practice between games where he plays 20 minutes. The most intense 20 minutes sure, but still 20 minutes nonetheless. Using the org to blame the player's failings in a terrible excuse.

Couldn't disagree more, the AHL is NOT a development league for players that can't hack it in the NHL. You are thinking of AHL vets, there's a big difference between guys like Terry, Chaput, Agostino, etc... and 20 year olds that are just finding their way. Why do most NHL players go through the AHL? Imo it's a lot easier to improve aspects of your game in the AHL vs the NHL. If you can't score in the AHL, chances are good you won't score in the NHL.

I just don't agree with how this organization develops players so to me you can certainly blame them at times as rushing prospects over and over doesn't seem to be working out so well. So either it's the scouting or the development side.

 

[ryan callahan]

Couldn't disagree more, the AHL is NOT a development league for players that can't hack it in the NHL. You are thinking of AHL vets, there's a big difference between guys like Terry, Chaput, Agostino, etc... and 20 year olds that are just finding their way. Why do most NHL players go through the AHL? Imo it's a lot easier to improve aspects of your game in the AHL vs the NHL. If you can't score in the AHL, chances are good you won't score in the NHL.

I just don't agree with how this organization develops players so to me you can certainly blame them at times as rushing prospects over and over doesn't seem to be working out so well. So either it's the scouting or the development side.

It's neither. The players we drafted didn't want to work on their weaknesses and got exposed at the higher level. If the player doesn't have the right mentality most of the time the org isn't gonna be able to do anything.

 

[montreal]

It's neither. The players we drafted didn't want to work on their weaknesses and got exposed at the higher level. If the player doesn't have the right mentality most of the time the org isn't gonna be able to do anything.

if it's the players then the scouts have to have some of the blame there for picking players that don't work hard.

So why do you think before Lefebvre we didn't seem to have this problem and since then it's been most of our top picks that played for him have struggled so badly. Did Timmins just get lucky early on, or did his lose his touch?

 

[Tyson]

I think putting Lefebvre as the coach of our top development league team messed this organization up for a long time-
Look at the current crop of youngsters playing under Bouchard-
Evans
Fleury
Vejdemo
Alain

All are doing well. Under Lefebvre it always seemed that our prospects were put in bad situations such as playing different roles, playing with the wrong players etc.
Yes you can blame the picks but I think the management team in place for all of those years is mostly to blame.

 

[montreal]

I think putting Lefebvre as the coach of our top development league team messed this organization up for a long time-
Look at the current crop of youngsters playing under Bouchard-
Evans
Fleury
Vejdemo
Alain

All are doing well. Under Lefebvre it always seemed that our prospects were put in bad situations such as playing different roles, playing with the wrong players etc.
Yes you can blame the picks but I think the management team in place for all of those years is mostly to blame.

who would have thought that hiring a guy that had zero games of experience as a head coach would backfire? Makes me wonder what could have happened had MB figured out much sooner that he should go in a different direction instead of re-hiring him not once but twice and even waited for him to see if he could get an NHL job offer.