Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part V)

Status
Not open for further replies.

HBDay

Registered User
Jan 28, 2013
2,945
1,465
75/25 split is close to what I think too. The team can only do so much. The problem on our Habs boards is the draft and development talk has gone on for years and people remember the dark years so much where I think it's overblown. We didn't have much to develop cause we only had 8 top 100 picks from 08-11 and that had a ripple effect.

Horrible AHL depth and a bad coach and some think we could of developed some of those assets into something more valuable. Yeah sure, maybe a guy like Tinordi turns into Pateryn? Wait, didn't we develop Pateryn? How could we develop Pateryn and not Tinordi? Both started in the AHL in 12/13 :sarcasm:

I'm glad you brought up the dark years, because we are seeing results now.

Victor Mete was given a walk on job to the first pair alongside shea weber, it didn't turn him into roman Josi. Just as sliding poehling into the top pair isn't going to make him getslaf.

Suzuki is playing a respectable 14 mins a night roughly, and his development is going great!

Not every player is going to walk on to a top line roll and explode fire and energy. In fact there is a distinct possibility that it could end poorly.

Honestly what I see right now is our young players playing, and being given good looks and good opportunities, there is no problem here!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TooLegitToQuit

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,918
East Coast
I'm glad you brought up the dark years, because we are seeing results now.

Victor Mete was given a walk on job to the first pair alongside shea weber, it didn't turn him into roman Josi. Just as sliding poehling into the top pair isn't going to make him getslaf.

Suzuki is playing a respectable 14 mins a night roughly, and his development is going great!

Not every player is going to walk on to a top line roll and explode fire and energy. In fact there is a distinct possibility that it could end poorly.

Honestly what I see right now is our young players playing, and being given good looks and good opportunities, there is no problem here!

Agreed. They will show us who they are in due time and I don't think we are messing with them in terms of them turning into a bust.

I was not crazy happy that we drafted Kotkaniemi as a long term prospect and changed our minds a few months later. Do I think we will ruin him? NO! He will turn into whoever he is and a lot has to do with the work he puts into it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: HBDay

DAChampion

Registered User
May 28, 2011
29,782
20,934
I'm glad you brought up the dark years, because we are seeing results now.

Victor Mete was given a walk on job to the first pair alongside shea weber, it didn't turn him into roman Josi. Just as sliding poehling into the top pair isn't going to make him getslaf.

Suzuki is playing a respectable 14 mins a night roughly, and his development is going great!

Not every player is going to walk on to a top line roll and explode fire and energy. In fact there is a distinct possibility that it could end poorly.

Honestly what I see right now is our young players playing, and being given good looks and good opportunities, there is no problem here!

Mete would have likely been better off spending one or two full seasons in the AHL.

You don't even understand the development-centric argument that you're criticizing. It's not about putting every player in the most minutes possible.
 
Last edited:

Wats

Error 520
Mar 8, 2006
41,962
6,616
They screwed it up yo yoing him between Ahl and Nhl so many times

He's a one of the more recent examples of how rushing a player to NHL because he doesn't look out of place at the moment isn't best for development. Tinordi/Leblanc/Juulsen(tbd) all made it at 20 years old too. We got bit lucky with Galchenyuk/Gallagher as they got half an year in OHL/AHL due to lockout before jumping to NHL.
 

Andrei79

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
14,849
26,095
Naaah. Everyone knows a player can display a hockey sense of a monkey, make the same mistakes over and over again, not improve his skating, strength and conditioning during several off-seasons, display a piss poor work ethic and he'd still turn out fine if only you'd grant him the mythical "top 6 minutes", "proper linemates" and be nice to him, because, you know, guy's got feelings. Now, that's proper development!

Its especially interesting when those prospects show positive signs only to regress year to year. Really makes you wonder about what could be at play.

Meh, nothing has any impact in any case so why even ask those questions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal and Mrb1p

Mrb1p

PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
Dec 10, 2011
87,762
53,487
Citizen of the world
DLR for Fabbri. On one side Im angry because if we couldve got a reclamation project that once had 15 points in 20 playoffs games for a guy that we waived means someone missed the boat somewhere (Bergevin, and to competent GM island), on the other side maybe DLR just got better by playing more and someone missed the boat somewhere (Bergevin, and to competent GM island.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: habsfan891

ECWHSWI

TOUGHEN UP.
Oct 27, 2006
28,604
5,423
I'm glad you brought up the dark years, because we are seeing results now.

Victor Mete was given a walk on job to the first pair alongside shea weber, it didn't turn him into roman Josi. Just as sliding poehling into the top pair isn't going to make him getslaf.

Suzuki is playing a respectable 14 mins a night roughly, and his development is going great!

Not every player is going to walk on to a top line roll and explode fire and energy. In fact there is a distinct possibility that it could end poorly.

Honestly what I see right now is our young players playing, and being given good looks and good opportunities, there is no problem here!
you talk like you havent watched anything but the Habs since the 60's or something...
 

ECWHSWI

TOUGHEN UP.
Oct 27, 2006
28,604
5,423
Mete would have likely been better off spending one or two full seasons in the AHL.

You don't even understand the development-centric argument that you're criticizing. It's not about putting every player in the most minutes possible.
not everyone realise the league is getting younger now, meaning more and more kids are being developped IN the NHL and just as many kids are becoming succesful being developped IN this league.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 26Mats and Mrb1p

1909

Registered User
Jul 6, 2016
20,533
11,139
Habs lost DLR for sweet nothing....

Wings got Fabbri...

DLR, next ex-Habs on a potential Stanley Cup winner (again) ????
 

Mrb1p

PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
Dec 10, 2011
87,762
53,487
Citizen of the world
Mete would have likely been better off spending one or two full seasons in the AHL.

You don't even understand the development-centric argument that you're criticizing. It's not about putting every player in the most minutes possible.
I don't think Mete was a mistake. He got his playing time, was allowed to do mistakes and he was allowed to become a better player with A LOT of playing time.

Maybe he'd benefit from more PP time, but at ES, I believe they did the right thing. Which is weird, because theyve never done this for anyone else (Danault fits and Gallagher are the two other that fit the bill.)
 

1909

Registered User
Jul 6, 2016
20,533
11,139
Maybe guys like McCarron and Tinordi become depth NHL players if they had better development and a winning environment. But were not developing them any more than that. That's my point.

That AHL depth was horrible for a long time! Lots of problems and the coach was only one problem

With Beaulieu and Galchenyuk, you can't teach IQ. They are who they are

.... Nor maturity..... And these two guys have fathers who were coaches.... Strange.
 
  • Like
Reactions: montreal

Andrei79

Registered User
Jan 25, 2013
14,849
26,095
Post was tongue in cheek, we all know this to be true, I guess the difference in my thinking compared to some of the group think is that in my opinion, development is 75% player 25% external factors such as coach etc.
Beaulieu, galchenyuk etc were never going to be excellent players even if claude could press right trigger and control them with an Xbox remote.

Its 25% external, but really its 0%. Its a token number I've seen posters write when what they really mean is "its all on the player".
 
  • Like
Reactions: DAChampion

Wats

Error 520
Mar 8, 2006
41,962
6,616
I just want to have a prospect pool with enough depth and talent that we don't have to worry that we didn't polish turds vigorously enough to turn them into 4th line players and bottom pairing defensemen.

No prospect pool is that good. Even Tampa/Boston develop.
 

DAChampion

Registered User
May 28, 2011
29,782
20,934
Its 25% external, but really its 0%. Its a token number I've seen posters write when what they really mean is "its all on the player".

It's also a stupid way of framing things.

They're thinking of it as a sum, as in final player = player contributions + coach contributions.

But it's not really a sum. It's more of a product. If a single term is 0, then the whole thing is 0.
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,918
East Coast
It hurts that the Habs traded up for this guy and Brayden Point went 6 spots after.

How many guys like Point (elite level talent) were taken in the 3rd round or later in the last dozen years? I count 1... Point

Tampa has done well with both top 10 picks, 2nd round, and 3rd round. It's impressive. Ducks, Lightning, Sens, Caps, Preds are the teams that stand out to me with drafting in the last 12 years. It's a factor on draft position power and how they hit.

SigNKao.jpg
 

montreal

Go Habs Go
Mar 21, 2002
57,333
39,849
www.youtube.com
Teams that draft well and have quantity working in their favor is the trend I noticed. Having patience is also key. You can only do so much in facilitating good development environments IMO. The kid turns into who they are at some point. If you rush them, might take longer.

agreed you can only do so much but what I think you overlook is the impact that rushing these kids or not putting them in the best position to succeed, has on their confidence and how much confidence means to players.

My question to people that don't put much stock in coaching, development is simple, not directed at just you but for anyone that played the game at any organized level, have you ever had a coach that just seemed to get the best out of you, no matter how either by what he says or does, but a coach that you feel gets you and that you feel has helped improved your game? I know I have had good and bad coaches so to me it means more then it would to others who maybe didn't have that experience.

Of course I could be wrong and just put too much into it, but you see how teams can turn things around quickly after the fire their coach. Of course there are tons of factors/variables into why and each would need to be looked at on it's own merit since each will be about different reasons why they turned it around.

I just think with the right coach, and if you work on building up the players confidence, put them in the right position to find success, it is a better way to go. Of course you won't turn a Connor Crisp into Super Mario, no would would ever suggest that of course, but when you have Beaulieu put up 28 pts in the NHL at age 23/24, clearly he has a decent amount of NHL skill. When McCarron was putting up close to a point per game in the AHL as a 20 year old rookie, and then can't even produce the same amount of points that he had in one month for the rest of the season, something is not right there. Who is to blame, what % of each group of management, coaching, scouting, development team, and player, well to me it's really more just semantics as we can't know who is really to blame since we don't have all the details since we aren't at practice or in the locker room.

But to me the biggest red flag is when you have the same scout and you have success at developing players under said scout and then for the next 6 years under different management, coaching and development team, you get almost nothing from your AHL team then I never understood how anyone could look at that situation and not say something is rotten here. Now to what degree, who holds more blame, I have been harder on Lefebvre but have also said all along that all parties involved share in the blame to some degree.

Either way we need to do a better job and hopefully that's happening under Bouchard, so far we haven't seen much in terms of call ups that played for him outside of a handful of games from Fleury and now there's Poehling although I wouldn't have put either in the NHL this year and Poehling has barely played for Bouchard.

Nothing more we could of done to develop players like Hudon, DLR, Scherbak, Beaulieu, Tinordi, etc. Maybe a better AHL team would help but how much? Not as much as you think

It could also be more then you think, it's very hard to know when we have so little info to go off other then watching them play and let's face it, how many people on this board watch a lot of our AHL team every year? So really they don't have a lot to go off other then when they get called up to the NHL or seeing them in preseason games (which I put very little stock in)

I do think 100% that some of the players would have faired better if handled differently, the question is by how much would it have mattered and that I can't answer and don't think anyone really can.

With Beaulieu and Galchenyuk, you can't teach IQ. They are who they are

that is true you can't teach IQ but how much can working with them improve it? We saw Beaulieu play better when he was paired with Gonchar, who he said helped him by talking to him. Now could he have ever been a better player if he had someone like Gonchar to work with him at 20 and they didn't rush him to the NHL. Of course that wasn't the only issue with him and he wouldn't be the only 1st round player that never lived up to the hype despite having the skill but not having the smarts. If it was just Beaulieu or Galchenyuk or Scherbak or DLR, or McCarron, or Tinordi or others but when all of them well that should set off alarm bells imo.
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,918
East Coast
agreed you can only do so much but what I think you overlook is the impact that rushing these kids or not putting them in the best position to succeed, has on their confidence and how much confidence means to players.

My question to people that don't put much stock in coaching, development is simple, not directed at just you but for anyone that played the game at any organized level, have you ever had a coach that just seemed to get the best out of you, no matter how either by what he says or does, but a coach that you feel gets you and that you feel has helped improved your game? I know I have had good and bad coaches so to me it means more then it would to others who maybe didn't have that experience.

Of course I could be wrong and just put too much into it, but you see how teams can turn things around quickly after the fire their coach. Of course there are tons of factors/variables into why and each would need to be looked at on it's own merit since each will be about different reasons why they turned it around.

I just think with the right coach, and if you work on building up the players confidence, put them in the right position to find success, it is a better way to go. Of course you won't turn a Connor Crisp into Super Mario, no would would ever suggest that of course, but when you have Beaulieu put up 28 pts in the NHL at age 23/24, clearly he has a decent amount of NHL skill. When McCarron was putting up close to a point per game in the AHL as a 20 year old rookie, and then can't even produce the same amount of points that he had in one month for the rest of the season, something is not right there. Who is to blame, what % of each group of management, coaching, scouting, development team, and player, well to me it's really more just semantics as we can't know who is really to blame since we don't have all the details since we aren't at practice or in the locker room.

But to me the biggest red flag is when you have the same scout and you have success at developing players under said scout and then for the next 6 years under different management, coaching and development team, you get almost nothing from your AHL team then I never understood how anyone could look at that situation and not say something is rotten here. Now to what degree, who holds more blame, I have been harder on Lefebvre but have also said all along that all parties involved share in the blame to some degree.

Either way we need to do a better job and hopefully that's happening under Bouchard, so far we haven't seen much in terms of call ups that played for him outside of a handful of games from Fleury and now there's Poehling although I wouldn't have put either in the NHL this year and Poehling has barely played for Bouchard.



It could also be more then you think, it's very hard to know when we have so little info to go off other then watching them play and let's face it, how many people on this board watch a lot of our AHL team every year? So really they don't have a lot to go off other then when they get called up to the NHL or seeing them in preseason games (which I put very little stock in)

I do think 100% that some of the players would have faired better if handled differently, the question is by how much would it have mattered and that I can't answer and don't think anyone really can.



that is true you can't teach IQ but how much can working with them improve it? We saw Beaulieu play better when he was paired with Gonchar, who he said helped him by talking to him. Now could he have ever been a better player if he had someone like Gonchar to work with him at 20 and they didn't rush him to the NHL. Of course that wasn't the only issue with him and he wouldn't be the only 1st round player that never lived up to the hype despite having the skill but not having the smarts. If it was just Beaulieu or Galchenyuk or Scherbak or DLR, or McCarron, or Tinordi or others but when all of them well that should set off alarm bells imo.

We can't criticize the development but also say we are overrating prospects. It don't work two ways. Not saying you in particular have done this but a lot of people have.

I think the development environment was poor with lack of depth and our coach (Sly). But I am not on the side of the fence where I think we could of done substantially more to get more out of those prospects. How do you teach hunger to improve and work hard? I guess you can be very hard on them and force them to work harder? Babcock style? In a way, Bouchard has this kind of influence as well.

I just think the development card is being used too much and it ignores the lack of top talent to develop.
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,918
East Coast
I agree with you. I went overboard with the traded players but even if we include them his record still sucks

Mete
Lehky
Gally
KK
Price
P.K.
Patches
Chucky
McDonagh
Sergachev
Halak
Andrighetto
Beaulieu (is he still a NHLer?)

After 16 years those are his contributions. The record speaks for itself. And my guts tell me we;ll be disappointed with the 17-18 picks.

Why does your gut tell you that? The trends in the draft +1/+2 of development, performances at the WJC, and how they are doing as a pro are all very good signs. When have we had this before? Especially in terms of quality/quantity!

Are you down cause of the past and you think it repeats itself? Let me make you feel better. Look at the last 12 years and how it's trending in the last 4. It's still very early but the Habs have not trended like this with our prospects in a very long time. It's a formula I have worked for a while now and I think it's the best yet in terms of actual NHL production and how teams do with drafting but also with draft position factored in. The next thing I need to work on is the goalies. Takes a lot of time and I'm only doing it in the summer now cause I don't have live stat tracking


HqSSzMS.jpg


feEpLJA.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jaffy27

montreal

Go Habs Go
Mar 21, 2002
57,333
39,849
www.youtube.com
Fabbri would be taking who’s spot exactly?

I'd take him over Weal as I don't think we are going anywhere so I'd rather take a gamble on a former 1st that's 23 vs paying Weal 1.4M at age 27 when he's never even had a full NHL season of 82 games and has bounced around with several teams.

But if I were running the Habs I would have picked up Fabbri since we have 12 picks and kept Poehling in Laval to work on things as long as it didn't cost anything higher then one of our many 4th round picks.

I think the development environment was poor with lack of depth and our coach (Sly). But I am not on the side of the fence where I think we could of done substantially more to get more out of those prospects. How do you teach hunger to improve and work hard? I guess you can be very hard on them and force them to work harder? Babcock style? In a way, Bouchard has this kind of influence as well.

I just think the development card is being used too much and it ignores the lack of top talent to develop.

No one ever said substantially more though, just better. To what degree is very difficult to say. Of course each has their own issues, Scherbak was known not to work hard, Beaulieu was never smart, Galchenyuk clearly had some issues off-ice and with his skating imo. Why did it take several years for McCarron to hire his own skating coach, on the other hand why did he have to, why didn't the Habs do this the day he was drafted? There are lots of questions and not many answers for us fans.

I look at things one way, you look at it differently, who is right, we'll likely never know and it's likely a little from both sides. I can only go off my years of playing, watching AHL, NCAA, USHS, junior, and Euro games, interviewing scouts, players, coaches, hockey media. But doesn't mean I'm right of course, just that I think some don't understand the impact of development, coaching, and the mental aspects of hockey.
 

Habs Halifax

Loyal Habs Fan
Jul 11, 2016
68,166
25,918
East Coast
No one ever said substantially more though, just better. To what degree is very difficult to say. Of course each has their own issues, Scherbak was known not to work hard, Beaulieu was never smart, Galchenyuk clearly had some issues off-ice and with his skating imo. Why did it take several years for McCarron to hire his own skating coach, on the other hand why did he have to, why didn't the Habs do this the day he was drafted? There are lots of questions and not many answers for us fans.

I look at things one way, you look at it differently, who is right, we'll likely never know and it's likely a little from both sides. I can only go off my years of playing, watching AHL, NCAA, USHS, junior, and Euro games, interviewing scouts, players, coaches, hockey media. But doesn't mean I'm right of course, just that I think some don't understand the impact of development, coaching, and the mental aspects of hockey.

It's a interesting debate. Someone said the 75/25 split on development between team and player and I agree with something close to that. Do I have an exact split? NO! Could be 90/10 or 60/40.

I just don't think we failed that bad cause we didn't have much to develop. It's OK to not agree. I respect your opinion more than most
 

Mrb1p

PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
Dec 10, 2011
87,762
53,487
Citizen of the world
Just freakin tired of the Timmins advocates that uses the same hindsight that they hate when we do it to blame him......but just to try to make him look better. Hey, in 2017, Timmins told Brunet, that he would have picked Carlson if he would have had the draft pick instead of trading it for Tanguay......yet...here's what he said in 2008....

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/10462/canadiens2008_draft_review/

“Myself, in my position, I look at the 25th-overall selection as projecting to having third-line upside. Tanguay’s a top-six forward.” The club was comfortable making the selection due to the wealth of talent and prospects it has amassed over the past few years’ worth of solid drafting. “We have done a good job developing our [farm] system over the years, so now it was time to make a move,” Timmins said.

Despite trading its way out its first selection, Timmins admitted that they were attempting to trade their way back into the first round. Unfortunately, the club just didn`t have the requisite assets required to obtain a selection. “Of course, you always want to have a first-round pick, especially late in the round when there was a [Quebec-league] player that we were interested in,” Timmins said. “We didn’t have two second-round picks this year and that’s what it would have taken to move up.”

Read more at http://www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/10462/canadiens2008_draft_review/#EeCcsvyFYFuMjIZD.99

HABS 1ST ROUNDER IN 2008 WOULD HAVE BEEN NICOLAS DESCHAMPS. AND NOT CARLSON.
Man thats quite a jump. How do you know he had the Q player at the number one spot and how do you know it was Deschamps?
 

montreal

Go Habs Go
Mar 21, 2002
57,333
39,849
www.youtube.com
It's a interesting debate. Someone said the 75/25 split on development between team and player and I agree with something close to that. Do I have an exact split? NO! Could be 90/10 or 60/40.

I just don't think we failed that bad cause we didn't have much to develop. It's OK to not agree. I respect your opinion more than most

thanks. I agree 100% though as it is a very interesting debate since it's meant so much as to why we have been in the mess we have been in. I don't have a % split as I don't think I could come up with one based off knowledge and it would be more guess work.

I do think we failed badly just because the results show that, but the question is how much better could it have been. It likely wouldn't have been too much better but how much would a decent improvement have meant to these kids and what impact would that have meant to us. It's very difficult to say imo.

Now we just have to hope we do better and to be honest I'm not a fan of the way management and Julien have handled things so I want them gone asap and hope that the next group lets Bouchard do his thing and that they at least try a different approach, take more caution until we at least see some better results. That's not say it won't work under the current guys, as who knows what Kotka, Suzuki, Poehling, Fleury, Mete turn into but it worries me when I hear the same things that were said about Galchenyuk in his first year and then we are seeing problems and it's just don't worry they are fine, CJ knows what he's doing, MB didn't rush the kid, etc.. If it goes wrong we got major problems in the future.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TooLegitToQuit

jaffy27

From Russia wth Pain
Nov 18, 2007
24,984
21,986
Orleans
I'd take him over Weal as I don't think we are going anywhere so I'd rather take a gamble on a former 1st that's 23 vs paying Weal 1.4M at age 27 when he's never even had a full NHL season of 82 games and has bounced around with several teams.

But if I were running the Habs I would have picked up Fabbri since we have 12 picks and kept Poehling in Laval to work on things as long as it didn't cost anything higher then one of our many 4th round picks.



No one ever said substantially more though, just better. To what degree is very difficult to say. Of course each has their own issues, Scherbak was known not to work hard, Beaulieu was never smart, Galchenyuk clearly had some issues off-ice and with his skating imo. Why did it take several years for McCarron to hire his own skating coach, on the other hand why did he have to, why didn't the Habs do this the day he was drafted? There are lots of questions and not many answers for us fans.

I look at things one way, you look at it differently, who is right, we'll likely never know and it's likely a little from both sides. I can only go off my years of playing, watching AHL, NCAA, USHS, junior, and Euro games, interviewing scouts, players, coaches, hockey media. But doesn't mean I'm right of course, just that I think some don't understand the impact of development, coaching, and the mental aspects of hockey.
Why does your gut tell you that? The trends in the draft +1/+2 of development, performances at the WJC, and how they are doing as a pro are all very good signs. When have we had this before? Especially in terms of quality/quantity!

Are you down cause of the past and you think it repeats itself? Let me make you feel better. Look at the last 12 years and how it's trending in the last 4. It's still very early but the Habs have not trended like this with our prospects in a very long time. It's a formula I have worked for a while now and I think it's the best yet in terms of actual NHL production and how teams do with drafting but also with draft position factored in. The next thing I need to work on is the goalies. Takes a lot of time and I'm only doing it in the summer now cause I don't have live stat tracking


HqSSzMS.jpg


feEpLJA.jpg

brace yourself for the ya but’s......
 
  • Like
Reactions: TooLegitToQuit
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->