But you do judge a head scout in hindsight. Just like every job in the world is. There are 2 games being played here. Who wins the draft one day after the draft. And who really wins it 5 years after. Timmins is fine at winning the after-draft. But it means nothing as reality kicks in.
I try and do full-spectrum evaluation of people rather than only seeing the results that are beyond their control.
There's really only one thing that Timmins could have done differently. He could have drafted more Europeans like Lehkonen, and thus bypassed the Lefebvre development issue. It may be fair to blame him for that.
In general the picks were good. Louis Leblanc was the consensus pick at his position, and was an outstanding third line rookie in 2012. He then busted once new management got a hold of him.
Galchenyuk was rated as the top prospect in the entire NHL, was widely lauded for his two-way play and hockey IQ, and was being compared to Hossa and Toews. He had a rookie season on par with those of Tavares and Stamos. He then busted.
The list goes on.
In general, Lefebvre (also Therrien) was an unmitigated disaster. His greatest success story is Gregory Pateryn, and the Habs didn't even realize that he was a decent player. Regardless, it's a terrible result after six years.
Anyway, science gives a way out. If you're right and I'm wrong, then Fleury, Brook, Evans, Poehling, etc will all bust. However, if they do well, then that will vindicate the view that the drafting was fine.
