Trevor Timmins Discussion Part III

[jaffy27]

2012 wasn't a good draft. Having 33rd overall is basically the same as a late 1st, it's close to the 25th, 26th, 26th selections our next three 1st round picks were. Just like our 3rd is basically like a 2nd in a year where the team does well.

Striking out with picks 33, 51, 64 really hurts, though Hudon may alleviate some of that pain.

But honestly it never makes sense to look at one draft since there are so few data points. You should always group a bunch of drafts together to see if there are trends. Which is why 2013 is telling, getting a couple 4th liners out of 25, 34, 36 points to a bit of a trend.

That said given Timmins previous track record I would tend to think the problem lies on the development side of things. Especially since there are numerous examples of poor development planning.

2012 second round wasn’t a good draft year for anyone, what, maybe 3 noteworthy players in the 2nd round......nothing special, it was a bad draft period

 

[Kriss E]

This is where the Timmins supporters just go wrong. To call 2012 a great draft because he nailed the #3 pick and Hudon might be hitting 40 points. Makes no sense. First, we never give teams for hitting a top 3 pick. Never. Nobody will say how Chicago was great for picking Toews. We'll hear how they just were lucky to be so bad. Yet, in Montreal, our head scout gets credit for getting right a No3 pick.

I think it depends. Raving about Galchenyuk is just silly. When someone who has not seen one game of any youngsters could make that selection, you really don't deserve any credit. We needed a center, Galch had terrific numbers, coming in as a big skilled center, he was an obvious pick. The only reservation was his injury, but given his age, no reason to doubt a recovery. If he wasn't injured, he might have gone #1 overall.
That was a pretty easy pick.
Now, this year, a lot of people had Kotkaniemi further down their lists. Some didn't even have him on the top 10. Zadina was a pretty favored #3 for a long while. So if Kotka becomes that awesome center, okay, no problem giving credit to them for it. They better hope he becomes one because if Zadina is significantly better, it'll be a major blowback.

Then, the excuse about the mandate. If Timmins, who is in charge, tells Bergevin that the big guy Bergevin is suppose to want will not be a NHL'er, the player will NOT be picked. Period. Timmins believed in McCarron just as much as Bergevin believed in him. If the sole mandate was to draft for size, why was Lehkonen chosen instead of Ismael-Diaby? Or Keegan Kanzig? And if that's how you explain the Crisp pick, why didn't he went John Hayden?

I think Timmins is running 100% of the show. Even if Bergevin tells him he wants a center, if Timmins tells him "no mate, you really do not want to pass on that Dman'', then I'm convinced he listens to Timmins.

2016? I guess you mean 2015? Well we'll see about Juulsen, there's just not enough infos right now. But what if there are others chosen after that does better? And it's all great to talk about the other picks how they are too far....

I think Juulsen will amount to very little. Bottom pairing guy, which fits a lot of what Timmins is good for, less quality but a lot of quantity.

And it's so easy to say that it's development and not the drafting. It's actually virtually impossible to know it. Unless a guy is picked....does nothing....is traded...and starts blossoming. Which even if that would be the case, it could be a case of the player taking charge himself of his growth. But you usually have to put both together.

Agreed. Impossible to really differ them. They go hand in hand for me. Maybe there wasn't a whole lot much Sly could do with some of the kids. At the same time, you are not going to tell me this is the absolute best results we could get. Not after 5-6 years. No way.
That also does not mean Timmins could not draft better.

Timmins has been subpar lately to say the least. A great supposed top 5 head scout is not supposed to need what everybody else needs. You don't become top 5 by picking top 3. You are supposed to be top 5 by how you can hit homeruns later on. The worst head scout would pick Crosby 1st. The worst head scout wouldn't pick Palat in the 7th round.

But there is a possibility that Timmins redeem himself with the last 2 drafts. That remains to be seen.

I think Timmins should have been replaced. Good or bad, sometimes you need a change. Fresh thoughts, different approach, different ideas, different business conduct, I think we are very much due.
That's not to say whoever comes in will automatically be better, but I think a change is in order. The failure of ever finding us a legit center is unacceptable to me. He's had over a decade.

For the last 2 drafts...well...we have Bouchard now so we can always just credit him for it

 

[WeThreeKings]

Not sure what it has to do with Timmins continually overhyping his prospects no matter where they are chosen, to see them again and again not come close to his own evaluation.

Besides...Ivan Chekovich would look pretty good in Laval. We could have picked him with the pick we sent back to get Henriksson....

Everyone overhypes their prospects. Have you heard a NHL head scout talk poorly about someone they've drafted before?

"Our Swedish scout really wanted this guy. So we traded to get the pick to take him. I think he sucks and is gonna quit hockey tho!"

 

[Le Barron de HF]

Yes on one hand Timmins could be more modest when talking about these hidden "gems" but at the end of the day we're talking about a 7th rounder who projected at best to be a Ericsson caliber of player (from Timmins himself). Odds were stacked against him from the get go.

 

[Whitesnake]

Wasn't Chekhovich picked in another draft?

WTK talked about the trade we did to acquire that Henriksson pick. The trade was the 7th round the year after. Year where Checkovich was picked after the draft pick we gave.

 

[Whitesnake]

Everyone overhypes their prospects. Have you heard a NHL head scout talk poorly about someone they've drafted before?

"Our Swedish scout really wanted this guy. So we traded to get the pick to take him. I think he sucks and is gonna quit hockey tho!"

WTK...come on man. There are liking the prospects you picked for their attributes and start the super overhyping like ...Valentenko is a more improved Emelin. Or Atvsin has some Ovechkin qualities. And Henriksson is like...Wow that type of guy you'll see in 4 years and say...Wow...who the heck is he????? Instead of just ''we drafted the kid 'cause he has an interesting set of skating and size''.

 

[WinterLion]

Yeah, TT usually picks one body builder per draft who has no impact on the ice.

Haha... I have to admit this is true....

 

[WeThreeKings]

WTK...come on man. There are liking the prospects you picked for their attributes and start the super overhyping like ...Valentenko is a more improved Emelin. Or Atvsin has some Ovechkin qualities. And Henriksson is like...Wow that type of guy you'll see in 4 years and say...Wow...who the heck is he????? Instead of just ''we drafted the kid 'cause he has an interesting set of skating and size''.

I think it's pretty much on the person if they believe the hype terms used by a guy that clearly loves his job.

 

[Whitesnake]

Yes on one hand Timmins could be more modest when talking about these hidden "gems" but at the end of the day we're talking about a 7th rounder who projected at best to be a Ericsson caliber of player (from Timmins himself). Odds were stacked against him from the get go.

My point was just about the always late gems Timmins keep talking about and NEVER blossom. Like...never. As of now, there is one guy that MIGHT end this Timmins drought....it's Cayden Primeau. Primeau, who Timmins could be the next Tom Brady...lol. No pressure there again. But at least, he waited till the end of his 1st year as a Habs to talk about the comparison. When we drafted Primeau, there wasn't too much overhype. Actually, it was Berglund who told them to draft him. So Timmins didn't overhype Primeau at the time. It didn't mean he thought Primeau was bad, on the contrary.

 

[Whitesnake]

I think it's pretty much on the person if they believe the hype terms used by a guy that clearly loves his job.

And again, if he'd be doing this for every pick, yeah, it would be on whoever believes it. But since he doesn't, see my comment about Primeau, it's not on anybody's but what he puts on himself. Just saying....I hear him talk about gems....and I didn't see any in the past 10 years at the very least.

 

[WeThreeKings]

And again, if he'd be doing this for every pick, yeah, it would be on whoever believes it. But since he doesn't, see my comment about Primeau, it's not on anybody's but what he puts on himself. Just saying....I hear him talk about gems....and I didn't see any in the past 10 years at the very least.

Well the specific quote about Henrikson that you're mentioning, is all Timmins saying what his Swedish scout said.

 

[Sorinth]

2012 second round wasn’t a good draft year for anyone, what, maybe 3 noteworthy players in the 2nd round......nothing special, it was a bad draft period

It was a bad draft, but we also got 0 NHL games out of our 2 picks when half the 2nd round played at least 1 NHL game. In the 3rd round over half the players drafted played an NHL game but again we get 0.

So the draft may have been a bad draft, but we were still bad when looking at it relative to other teams. For example, both Carolina and Nashville had two 2nd round picks, and both came away with 2 NHL players, Dallas had 3 picks and at least got one NHL player.

 

[Sorinth]

But that's the whole point, how can you just ignore the 3rd overall pick, the most important thing to get right in the whole draft, when analyzing a draft?

See Edmonton: Yakupov, Columbus: Murray, NYI: Griffin Reinhart, for how important it is to use a top 5 pick well.

I'm not ignoring it, but it's not like we got a stud either. We didn't screw up the pick, but that's about the best we can say. And not screwing up a top-5 pick is what I would call average.

 

[The Great Weal]

WTK talked about the trade we did to acquire that Henriksson pick. The trade was the 7th round the year after. Year where Checkovich was picked after the draft pick we gave.

And we got Primeau no?

 

[Whitesnake]

And we got Primeau no?

We had 2 picks in that round. We actually gained the pick from the Flyers to get Primeau. In exchange for a 2018th 7th rounder. Which, funnily enough, we got back by trading with again the Flyers....for a 2019 7th rounder....

Habs had traded their own pick in 2017 to the Jets to get their hands on Henriksson in 2016.

 

[The Great Weal]

We had 2 picks in that round. We actually gained the pick from the Flyers to get Primeau. In exchange for a 2018th 7th rounder. Which, funnily enough, we got back by trading with again the Flyers....for a 2019 7th rounder....

Habs had traded their own pick in 2017 to the Jets to get their hands on Henriksson in 2016.

So we still got Primeau. Obviously Timmins isnt going to hit every prospect, but Primeau is looking dann good.

 

[Whitesnake]

So we still got Primeau. Obviously Timmins isnt going to hit every prospect, but Primeau is looking dann good.

It's looking awesome. Just what Primeau did so far is nothing short but extraordinairy. Just his last year makes him a top 5 prospect. But....we will be there where we will be. Not that long ago, McNiven was the second coming of. Now...nobody talks about him. So you only become a great prospect when you actually make it. But yes, it's looking awfully good. My point still stands....no gems were discovered by Timmins since Mark Streit maybe. That's 2004. Gallagher wasn't a late hidden gem...he was said to be picked earlier. And at worst being picked exactly around that time. So everytime you hear Timmins talk about late hidden gem...it just hasn't happen in 14 years....yet. But there are candidates to be seen in the upcmoing years. Evans, Primeau, Addison, maybe Tyzska? I will not be putting Fondstad and McShane in that list, those guys were supposed to go earlier and they were clearly BPA at the pick we chose them.

 

[montreal]

Even if a hypothetical elite of the elite scout would always hit 1 out of every 2 early 2nds, I would still consider that scout elite if they missed on both early 2nds, but then found someone worthy of those selections in the 5th round.

If Hudon becomes a 40 to 50 point guy from the 3rd line, it absolutely does make up for it and makes it, not a good draft, but a great draft. Not all time great, but great. If we found a top 9 forward or top 4 dman every year outside of the 1st round, plus hit our 1st rounder, we'd be perennial contenders.

It's not as easy to hit at #3 as people are taking it for granted. We could be in the same position as the Oilers, Blue Jakcets, and Islanders if we drafted like them. Oh wait, we are where they are/used to be. But that's the point: it's not Timmins' fault, it's Bergevin. In Tampa, his scouts messed up when they took Drouin ahead of Seth Jones. But Yzerman (a good GM) rectified the situation by trading Drouin for Sergachev (not coincidentally to our incompetent GM). Meanwhile our GMs do the opposite: instead of trading out bad picks for good players, they trade our good picks for bad ones: McDonagh for Gomez, Subban for old Weber, Galchenyuk for Domi (not good enough), Sergachev for Drouin, and to top it off can't even resign our star vets (Radulov and Markov)...

I know that some years it's just not a strong draft, '12 and '13 aren't looking so hot so I can see missing out on high picks those years but then the other years you need to hit on them if you are a top scout. It does seem like Timmins does better in the 5th round then the 2nd, when you consider how unlikely it is to find an NHLer in the 5th round. That said we'll see what Hudon turns into, if he's a 50 pt player that's huge.

Clearly management has f***ed over Timmins, through asset management and poor development decisions. I've strongly voiced my displeasure over the decisions they have made and said that while Timmins and his staff along with said players also share the blame, had management not rushed them and then gave them the yo-yo treatment and had we put a better AHL coach in place things might have gone at least a little better which in turn would make Timmins look a little better.

Im pretty sure the top half of the 2nd round is worse than the later half.

that doesn't even make sense, what data shows picking later is better cause I've never seen that before.

Wait, do we still blame Timmins for the draft or is Churla the direct responsible? I realize Timmins is still linked to the draft but is Churla or timmins the true head scout?

Whoever it is, it hasn't been impressive for an organization with big money in their pockets.

We can't know what goes on behind the scenes, but it certainly sounds like Timmins runs things. Now how much say does Churla have, if he wants to pick Connor Crisp, does Timmins just give the ok or does he override him if he doesn't agree?

 

[Chili]

Each year I like to break down the opening rosters by orignal drafting/signing team.

I went over the projected rosters for this coming season and these are the NHL players the Habs scouts have found (with number of goals last season in brackets):

Sven Andrighetto (8)
Jacob De La Rose (4)
Alex Galchenyuk (19)
Brendan Gallagher (31)
Charles Hudon (10)
Arturi Lekhonen (12)
Max Pacioretty (17)
Tomas Plekanec (6)
Nikita Scherback (4)
Nathan Beaulieu (1)
Ron Hainsey (4)
Jakub Jerabek (2)
Noah Juulsen (1)
Ryan McDonagh (4)
Victor Mete (0)
Mikhaïl Sergachev (9)
PK Subban (16)
Yannick Weber (2)
Mike Condon
Jaro Halak
Carey Price

Two others with shots to make NHL opening rosters:
Daniel Carr (6)
Gabriel Dumont (1)

I plan to post the league results after the opening rosters are released in October.

The group above combined for 157 goals last season. FWIW, Worst offence in the league was Buffalo with 199 goals.

 

[LyricalLyricist]

Each year I like to break down the opening rosters by orignal drafting/signing team.

I went over the projected rosters for this coming season and these are the NHL players the Habs scouts have found (with number of goals last season in brackets):

Sven Andrighetto (8)
Jacob De La Rose (4)
Alex Galchenyuk (19)
Brendan Gallagher (31)
Charles Hudon (10)
Arturi Lekhonen (12)
Max Pacioretty (17)
Tomas Plekanec (6)
Nikita Scherback (4)
Nathan Beaulieu (1)
Ron Hainsey (4)
Jakub Jerabek (2)
Noah Juulsen (1)
Ryan McDonagh (4)
Victor Mete (0)
Mikhaïl Sergachev (9)
PK Subban (16)
Yannick Weber (2)
Mike Condon
Jaro Halak
Carey Price

Two others with shots to make NHL opening rosters:
Daniel Carr (6)
Gabriel Dumont (1)

I plan to post the league results after the opening rosters are released in October.

The group above combined for 157 goals last season. FWIW, Worst offence in the league was Buffalo with 199 goals.

I would argue that you need to refine the data(Not really need, just advise. I wouldn't tell you to actually do work for free). There's a problem because Price is a #1G, Mcdonagh, Subban are top pairing Ds. These are good selections but they do not have much weight for goals as say a forward would have. Try dividing them into different positions, there's more data to look at but the aggregate can be misleading. If you don't want to, don't. Just friendly advise.

 

[Chili]

I would argue that you need to refine the data(Not really need, just advise. I wouldn't tell you to actually do work for free). There's a problem because Price is a #1G, Mcdonagh, Subban are top pairing Ds. These are good selections but they do not have much weight for goals as say a forward would have. Try dividing them into different positions, there's more data to look at but the aggregate can be misleading. If you don't want to, don't. Just friendly advise.

I do analysis out of my own curiosity and post results here. If there is an analysis you`d like to do, there are plenty of resources to help (i.e. hockeydb, hockey reference, etc.) and many have already been done to save you the time.

The simple rule of thumb for me is to apply the same criteria across the board.
1C , 1D, 1G is adding a level of subjectivity that doesn`t fit with that. If it interests you though, I encourage you to take the time., even if it`s just a comparative within the division.

I do intend to do some league wide comparisons based on the opening rosters as relates back to the draft and post results here. The numbers will be whatever they are, the only argument will be if they are inaccurate and I do double and triple check stuff but it`s still possible.

 

[26Mats]

Each year I like to break down the opening rosters by orignal drafting/signing team.

I went over the projected rosters for this coming season and these are the NHL players the Habs scouts have found (with number of goals last season in brackets):

Sven Andrighetto (8)
Jacob De La Rose (4)
Alex Galchenyuk (19)
Brendan Gallagher (31)
Charles Hudon (10)
Arturi Lekhonen (12)
Max Pacioretty (17)
Tomas Plekanec (6)
Nikita Scherback (4)
Nathan Beaulieu (1)
Ron Hainsey (4)
Jakub Jerabek (2)
Noah Juulsen (1)
Ryan McDonagh (4)
Victor Mete (0)
Mikhaïl Sergachev (9)
PK Subban (16)
Yannick Weber (2)
Mike Condon
Jaro Halak
Carey Price

Two others with shots to make NHL opening rosters:
Daniel Carr (6)
Gabriel Dumont (1)

I plan to post the league results after the opening rosters are released in October.

The group above combined for 157 goals last season. FWIW, Worst offence in the league was Buffalo with 199 goals.

McDonagh Subban
Sergachev Juulsen
Mete Hainsey
Beaulieu Weber

Price
Halak

is perhaps the best drafted back end amongst active teams. But that won't show up if you rank a draft by points, let alone goals leaving out assists.

 

[Chili]

McDonagh Subban
Sergachev Juulsen
Mete Hainsey
Beaulieu Weber

Price
Halak

is perhaps the best drafted back end amongst active teams. But that won't show up if you rank a draft by points, let alone goals leaving out assists.

It`s not intended to be a ranking, just a comparison. People can and will draw their own conclusions.

Based on LL`s suggestion though it`s easy enough to break any goal/points comparison down by forwards and defence.

I am curious though on what measurable comparative you are basing that blueline being the best?

 

[26Mats]

It`s not intended to be a ranking, just a comparison. People can and will draw their own conclusions.

Based on LL`s suggestion though it`s easy enough to break any goal/points comparison down by forwards and defence.

I am curious though on what measurable comparative you are basing that blueline being the best?

I did a comparison a while back and asked my self which back end I would rather have. If I remember correctly the only team that was comparable (and probably better to be honest) was Nashville. It was a couple years ago, and based on all players drafted since 2003 when Timmins took over, so included former 62 point all star dman Streit, and bottom pairing/7th dman Emelin. Streit slides into Hainsey's spot:

McDonagh Subban
Streit Sergachev
Mete Juulsen
Beaulieu, Emelin, Y. Weber

seems to be Timmins best d picks. After drafting for size so much up until about 2014, I'm hoping he's back to drafting for skill. When Subban was drafted he was only 5'11 and some had concerns about his size. But Timmins said he was a raw talent he had to have.

 

[Chili]

I did a comparison a while back and asked my self which back end I would rather have. If I remember correctly the only team that was comparable (and probably better to be honest) was Nashville. It was a couple years ago, and based on all players drafted since 2003 when Timmins took over, so included former 62 point all star dman Streit, and bottom pairing/7th dman Emelin. Streit slides into Hainsey's spot:

McDonagh Subban
Streit Sergachev
Mete Juulsen
Beaulieu, Emelin, Y. Weber

seems to be Timmins best d picks. After drafting for size so much up until about 2014, I'm hoping he's back to drafting for skill. When Subban was drafted he was only 5'11 and some had concerns about his size. But Timmins said he was a raw talent he had to have.

That`s one way to compare and I won`t argue with it. But it`s based on opinion.

The comparisons that interest me remove opinions (and myths).

Stuff gets repeated so much on the net that it gets accepted as fact after a while when often it has little or no real basis.