Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part IV)

[montreal]

Sure, but Hallander doesnt look like much of a NHL player to me, didnt look like one in 2018, doesnt look like one now. Theres little offensive upside with the Timra boys IMO

can't really say I agree, he certainly looks like he'll have a solid chance to be an NHLer. I'd also consider signing Olofsson's some times winger in Tornqvist, he's got good speed and is having a major breakout at 22 as he's not too far from reaching his career total of points in one season on a team that doesn't score much. They also have a 21 year old RD Johannes Kinnvall that's scoring goals, 2nd on the team.

 

[Mrb1p]

can't really say I agree, he certainly looks like he'll have a solid chance to be an NHLer. I'd also consider signing Olofsson's some times winger in Tornqvist, he's got good speed and is having a major breakout at 22 as he's not too far from reaching his career total of points in one season on a team that doesn't score much. They also have a 21 year old RD Johannes Kinnvall that's scoring goals, 2nd on the team.

I was referring to Olo and Hallander only. I see little upside in them, theres just so much has to go right for them to.pan out.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

I think I’d keep Romanov over Brook if I could only keep one, but I do agree Brook has the better chance at being that 50+ point guy.

 

[Andrei79]

On the topic of scouts, why do we only have two leagues in which we have three scouts ? Is it a huge coincidence that since they hired three scouts for the WHL and the states we've had a higher success rate ? Ever since they hired two more scouts for the WHL in 2016, they've drafted Brook, Fleury, Fonstad and Stapley and they've drafted Poehling, Primeau and Harris in the states... Like, ****ing employ more scouts you're a multi million dollar franchise.

To top it all off they have scouts splitting duties in the east and only two dedicated OHL scouts... thats for the biggest talent pipeline in the world... This team is driving me insane.

Rockstrom is also a big problem for me. Guy has hit twice in his 40 year career... Maybe he's just not that good ? Lundqvist and Lidstrom are HOF players, sure, but his success rate is absolutely horrible... The only other things he has to show for are Jonnson, Hagelin, DLR, Fast and Sundstrom. I mean, sure, keep him if you want, but hire someone else, I'm happy they did.

You're very wrong here.

Rockstrom was responsible for waaayy more than those players. He was a European scout for the Wings and Rangers. With the Wings, he was the one pushing for Lidstrom, Konstantinov and Fedorov. He was pushing hard for them to select Bure as well. On the Rangers, he was responsible for Zubov and Kovalev. Then there's Norstrom, Johnsson, Lundqvist, Tyutin, Zidlicky, Prucha.

Both the Lidstrom and Lundqvist selections are legendary. The Rangers would've missed Lundqvist as well had Martin Madden had his way and the GM not glanced at Rockstroms notebook.

Sometimes, its more of a matter of circumstances: not having the picks at the right time (who knows where he ranked Pastrnak -> Timmins and MB do though and maybe he had him very high) and not having enough pull. But, his track record is impressive. I do agree though with the notion that the we can afford more.

 

[Mrb1p]

You're very wrong here.

Rockstrom was responsible for waaayy more than those players. He was a European scout for the Wings and Rangers. With the Wings, he was the one pushing for Lidstrom, Konstantinov and Fedorov. He was pushing hard for them to select Bure as well. On the Rangers, he was responsible for Zubov and Kovalev. Then there's Norstrom, Johnsson, Lundqvist, Tyutin, Zidlicky, Prucha.

Both the Lidstrom and Lundqvist selections are legendary. The Rangers would've missed Lundqvist as well had Martin Madden had his way and the GM not glanced at Rockstroms notebook.

Sometimes, its more of a matter of circumstances: not having the picks at the right time (who knows where he ranked Pastrnak -> Timmins and MB do though and maybe he had him very high) and not having enough pull. But, his track record is impressive. I do agree though with the notion that the we can afford more.

I dont see the record where he was euro scout. Anyway at some point theres only so many games you can watch... is it realistic to think he covered russia, finland, Sweden and czechoslovakia? Especially back then when they didnt have access to the internet and all.

Also, one could say the same thing for Timmins, so now we need to absolve him of every criticism

Seriously I dont know much about Rockstrom and Im just talking out of my ass, I just know he made a shitload of picks in sweden and fanned a lot, like way more than usual.

 

[Goldenhands]

I think I’d keep Romanov over Brook if I could only keep one, but I do agree Brook has the better chance at being that 50+ point guy.

Tough call, both will be fans favorites... Romanov's physicality and feistyness will wow the fans and make the Bell center vibrate on multiple occasions, sometimes a brutal hit can change the momentum of the game as much as a goal and thats what you get in Romanov, a physical beast with great mobility who can play hockey as well!

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

Tough call, both will be fans favorites... Romanov's physicality and feistyness will wow the fans and make the Bell center vibrate on multiple occasions, sometimes a brutal hit can change the momentum of the game as much as a goal and thats what you get in Romanov, a physical beast with great mobility who can play hockey as well!

Romanov is just the better all around player IMO. Brook is more of the offensive dynamo.

 

[Goldenhands]

Romanov is just the better all around player IMO. Brook is more of the offensive dynamo.

I dont think the gap is significant between both players regarding their all around game, sometimes Romanov will get a bit out of position to deliever his hits while Brook will get the job done defensively with his IQ... I think Romanov is indeed the better all around player but not by much while Brook is probably going to quarterback a PP, so its pretty tough for me to rank one over the other at this point...

 

[Andrei79]

I dont see the record where he was euro scout. Anyway at some point theres only so many games you can watch... is it realistic to think he covered russia, finland, Sweden and czechoslovakia? Especially back then when they didnt have access to the internet and all.

Also, one could say the same thing for Timmins, so now we need to absolve him of every criticism

Seriously I dont know much about Rockstrom and Im just talking out of my ass, I just know he made a ****load of picks in sweden and fanned a lot, like way more than usual.

Not messing with you here, he's famous for those picks I mentioned. He was the european scout for the Wings and left when Smith went to the Rangers. He saw Kovalev as a sort of soviet Gretzky due to his skill level. The thing is, the Wings didn't miss a beat because he was replaced by Hakan Andersson.

I was annoyed at Olofssons lack of involvement offensively in both the 5 nations and the U18s last year. But, I totally get why someone would push hard for him where we were picking. He has everything, smarts included. He just needs to learn to be more involved. Its a good risk, just like picking Hillis as well.

As far as Timmins, youre not entirely wrong. I criticize him, but I can appreciate how he's done well the last three drafts. Who knows what impact Gauthier running skeleton crews or MB asking his team to go for size and character had.

 

[NotProkofievian]

Not messing with you here, he's famous for those picks I mentioned. He was the european scout for the Wings and left when Smith went to the Rangers. He saw Kovalev as a sort of soviet Gretzky due to his skill level. The thing is, the Wings didn't miss a beat because he was replaced by Hakan Andersson.

I was annoyed at Olofssons lack of involvement offensively in both the 5 nations and the U18s last year. But, I totally get why someone would push hard for him where we were picking. He has everything, smarts included. He just needs to learn to be more involved. Its a good risk, just like picking Hillis as well.

As far as Timmins, youre not entirely wrong. I criticize him, but I can appreciate how he's done well the last three drafts. Who knows what impact Gauthier running skeleton crews or MB asking his team to go for size and character had.

Feels like it was just last year that TLTQ was arguing that we haven't seen what years 2012-2015 were giving us, and it was too early to throw everyone under the bus.

Life comes at you fast.

 

[NotProkofievian]

It's kind of tough to say, I go back and forth between Romanov and Brook. If Brook's offence translates, and he's able to play big 5 on 5 minutes, then I think it's pretty clearly Brook. But we don't know if it will because CHL players don't get the opportunity to play against more difficult competition. Whereas Romanov is currently holding down a job in a league that is fast as f***, and progressing before our very eyes. The proof is more evident for Romanov, but the promise is tantalizing for Brook.

Upside is ultimately meaningless if you can't get the icetime. This is one major and underrated reason why Kotkaniemi is so promising. We're not going to go through the same bullshit we went through with Galchenyuk of demotions and promotions and position switching. He's a center, and he's going to get lots of minutes sooner rather than later.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I wouldn't trade Brook or Romanov unless I'm getting a Provorov or something back that's an established, rightly aged top pairing defenseman under contract.

 

[dinodebino]

I wouldn't trade Brook or Romanov unless I'm getting a Provorov or something back that's an established, rightly aged top pairing defenseman under contract.

Agreed 100%. We made the mistake once, let's not repeat it.
Can we just keep our young assets for once?

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

Agreed 100%. We made the mistake once, let's not repeat it.
Can we just keep our young assets for once?

No one is saying we should trade one lol, just discussing who’d we keep if we were forced to move one- it’s a fun little excercise as they both are excellent.

 

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

Agreed 100%. We made the mistake once, let's not repeat it.
Can we just keep our young assets for once?

We did and they turned out like shit.

Jarred Tinordi
Brendan Gallagher*

Nathan Beaulieu
Daniel Pribyl

Alex Galchenyuk*
Sebastian Collberg
Dalton Thrower
Charles Hudon

Mike McCarron
Jacob De La Rose
Zach Fucale
Artturi Lehkonen
Sven Andrighetto
Martin Reway

Nikita Scherbak
Jake Evans**

Then you add on the little excitement/hype for Morgan Ellis, Darren Dietz, Magnus Nygren, Alexander Avtsin

* = Actual useful player and 1 was a 3rd overall pick.

** = potentially useful player.

This team can't draft. Some of our drafted players might turn into something, but not all. Why not trade potential for established players? I would love to get Gostisbehere and would be willing to give up picks and prospects. If that's what they wanted.

 

[dinodebino]

We did and they turned out like ****.

Jarred Tinordi
Brendan Gallagher*

Nathan Beaulieu
Daniel Pribyl

Alex Galchenyuk*
Sebastian Collberg
Dalton Thrower
Charles Hudon

Mike McCarron
Jacob De La Rose
Zach Fucale
Artturi Lehkonen
Sven Andrighetto
Martin Reway

Nikita Scherbak
Jake Evans**

Then you add on the little excitement/hype for Morgan Ellis, Darren Dietz, Magnus Nygren, Alexander Avtsin

* = Actual useful player and 1 was a 3rd overall pick.

** = potentially useful player.

This team can't draft. Some of our drafted players might turn into something, but not all. Why not trade potential for established players? I would love to get Gostisbehere and would be willing to give up picks and prospects. If that's what they wanted.

Because no one builds a championship team with trades. This ain't the 90's. Draft well and develop, only way to have a solid base. No other formula exists. Trades and UFAs are there to fill out the few blanks left. Not the other way around.

This team is 3-4 years from being a contender. Let's develop for once.

 

[montreal]

I don't see how Romanov is the better all round player then Brook. I don't think it's close either. I see Brook as someone that if everything goes right would be something close to what Subban or Markov brought. Not comparing them as players but in terms of production and impact. Romanov is a lot tougher since his offense is hard to project, he can move the puck and has a nice shot but if he was in the CHL next year I would be shocked if he was one of the top scorers like Brook who's putting up insane numbers and it's not like he's on a stacked team.

 

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

Because no one builds a championship team with trades. This ain't the 90's. Draft well and develop, only way to have a solid base. No other formula exists. Trades and UFAs are there to fill out the few blanks left. Not the other way around.

This team is 3-4 years from being a contender. Let's develop for once.

Develop what, though ? Our team has a history of being bad at drafting and you ignored that.

 

[dinodebino]

Develop what, though ? Our team has a history of being bad at drafting and you ignored that.

You don't seem to believe in the last two years of assets. So why argue?

 

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

You don't seem to believe in the last two years of assets. So why argue?

You mean all those picks that might turn out ?

I'm not saying trade them for rentals I'm saying trade some for a player with term that can help the team.

 

[dinodebino]

You mean all those picks that might turn out ?

I'm not saying trade them for rentals I'm saying trade some for a player with term that can help the team.

Quality players, yes. Not making trades for the sake of it.

 

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

Quality players, yes. Not making trades for the sake of it.

Trades I want done for the sake of a trade is Lehkonen for another struggling player, or crap players for good ones.

Our prospects I would trade to ger an established player with term that fits a need.

 

[Mrb1p]

I wouldn't trade Brook or Romanov unless I'm getting a Provorov or something back that's an established, rightly aged top pairing defenseman under contract.

Im going to go out on a limb here... Brook IS a Provorov.

 

[sharks9]

Develop what, though ? Our team has a history of being bad at drafting and you ignored that.

Just because we had some bad years drafting doesn't mean we should never keep our assets and always trade them away. What if we had traded Subban for a rental because "he'll just bust like Fischer!" Every single team in the league has busts, especially when you're mostly drafting in the bottom of each round. Not all prospects are untouchable, but guys like Romanov, Brook, Poehling, and Suzuki should be kept unless we're getting proven young players back.

 

[jaffy27]

You mean all those picks that might turn out ?

I'm not saying trade them for rentals I'm saying trade some for a player with term that can help the team.

Yes, the players that won best goalie, forward and defenceman of WJC.

The ones that have over 300pts in OHL and that are already playing in the NHL.....

You can’t even begin to compare those years you listed vs what we’ve been able to pick up the last two years.