Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part V)

[Archijerej]

There are a lot of kids on these boards who are too young to remember anything about a draft that was 7 years ago.

Galchenyuk was the most unanimously agreed upon first round pick on this board that I have seen in my 21 years here on HFBoards. Perhaps Sergachev comes close but that is it. He was the center that almost everyone was clamouring for. There was very little support for taking Rielly, as the most vocal opposition to Galchenyuk was from Grigorenko supporters but even that crowd dwindled significantly as the draft approached. There were small pockets of Forsberg supporters but it really was about getting that center and it was a landslide victory for Galchenyuk.

All this is true. But are we judging the work of our scouts based on the popular opinion at the time of the draft? I remember people being up in arms when we picked Price. It turned out our scouting staff did it's job and nailed that pick. Surely, that's the standard one should be expecting. On the other hand, when the dust settled on the 2012 selections, it became clear there were several better options than Galchenyuk. Seems like Andrei Kostitsyn all over again.

 

[Garo]

Seems like Andrei Kostitsyn all over again.

Yeah, not really. 2012 wasn't very good and 2003 was top 3 all time, that alone makes comparisons not really sensible. Like, you can argue for maybe two picks that would be logical - Reilly and Forsberg - then you have to go on the back half of the round. 2003 had all those great picks surrounding Kostitsyn and Jessiman.

Subban, Mcdonagh, Sergachev Y. Weber, Beaulieu were all traded and beside Subban all others never had a impact for Mtl or brought any significant value back.

Streit was bounce between D and FW before he last lost to UFA.

Emelin had a career

Mete, Juulsen, Romanov, Brook haven’t done anything in the NHL yet...

I says that isn’t much to brag about

I like how you're putting down Timmins for all the things Timmins has about zero control over. That makes a lot of sense.

 

[Estimated_Prophet]

All this is true. But are we judging the work of our scouts based on the popular opinion at the time of the draft? I remember people being up in arms when we picked Price. It turned out our scouting staff did it's job and nailed that pick. Surely, that's the standard one should be expecting. On the other hand, when the dust settled on the 2012 selections, it became clear there were several better options than Galchenyuk. Seems like Andrei Kostitsyn all over again.

It took 5-6 years before the Galchenyuk pick really looked that questionable. It was unanimously the correct pick 4 years after the draft so I would say it was a good pick that didn't work out solely due to the player developing attitude problems that were not at all evident in 2012.

Price was a different story as he was expected to go closer to 10th but that wasn't the actual issue. The problem wasn't with Price as a prospect it was that we had a Hart trophy winner and one of the top goaltending prospects in the game at the time (Theodore, Garon). There didn't appear to be any sense in selecting a goalie when we appeared to be as stacked as any team in that regard.

My problem with the previous poster was that he was making false claims about players being ranked ahead of Galchenyuk and Timmins reaching for the pick.

For the record I, possibly more than anyone don't hold these rankings in high regard. I usually give far more weight to Timmins and company than these silly rankings made by people who aren't good enough to be hired as scouts in the first place. Unfortunately the only comparative we have to establish consensus rankings are these independent lists. It would be great if every team posted their priority list after the draft but that will never happen and for good reason.

 

[the valiant effort]

Galchenyuk was an unfortunate selection from day 1, there's no need to hate on the observers that had a bit of foresight in that regard. Nice hands, no wheels, no chance at being a player.

 

[Miller Time]

Galchenyuk was an unfortunate selection from day 1, there's no need to hate on the observers that had a bit of foresight in that regard. Nice hands, no wheels, no chance at being a player.

"No chance at being a player"...

Yet leads his draft class in NHL games played, 2nd (by 11 pts) in NHL points...


But let's not let trivial things like games played & points produced get in the way of such a compelling argument

 

[Archijerej]

"No chance at being a player"...

Yet leads his draft class in NHL games played, 2nd (by 11 pts) in NHL points...


But let's not let trivial things like games played & points produced get in the way of such a compelling argument

Several players better then him are defencemen, so it's not really a best way to look at this. There are also several forwards who are without a doubt better than him, but broke into the league at a later date.

 

[Miller Time]

Several players better then him are defencemen, so it's not really a best way to look at this. There are also several forwards who are without a doubt better than him, but broke into the league at a later date.

Neither of your points support the idiotic claim that he "had no chance at being a player", which is what I was responding to.

As for redrafting or ranking the players from that draft class, no matter how one chooses to evaluate impact, as of today, 7 years later, he remains one of the top players from that year... wether that's top 5?, top 10?, top 15? is a matter of subjective opinion. As is where one would rank various Dmen from that class.

he's #1 in games played & #2 in points. Those two objective facts aren't up for debate.

Not sure where he sits in ppg, though I'd be surprised if it wasn't top 5 or so.

Bottom line, was the right pick at the time and there's no real case to be made otherwise beyond the obvious hindsight that plays out with everything single draft class.

 

[calder candidate]

Yeah, not really. 2012 wasn't very good and 2003 was top 3 all time, that alone makes comparisons not really sensible. Like, you can argue for maybe two picks that would be logical - Reilly and Forsberg - then you have to go on the back half of the round. 2003 had all those great picks surrounding Kostitsyn and Jessiman.



I like how you're putting down Timmins for all the things Timmins has about zero control over. That makes a lot of sense.

We don’t if he was consulted or not but you can’t give him too much credit for player that have yet to play in the NHL or that are fringe like Beaulieu... If you take the same standard and apply it to other team I think you see that it isn’t much better than avg. since 5 out of 6 D came in via trade.

 

[Adam Michaels]

Timmins will be with Tony in about an hour.

 

[26Mats]

Subban, Mcdonagh, Sergachev Y. Weber, Beaulieu were all traded and beside Subban all others never had a impact for Mtl or brought any significant value back.

Streit was bounce between D and FW before he last lost to UFA.

Emelin had a career

Mete, Juulsen, Romanov, Brook haven’t done anything in the NHL yet...

I says that isn’t much to brag about

That McDonagh and Streit were lost for nothing in extremely poor asset management by Gainey has nothing to do with the drafting...

Remember Streight was a 62 point all star...

We'll see what becomes of Sergachev, Mete, Juulsen, Romanov and Brook... That will determine his legacy.

But Subban, McDonagh, and Streit was a good start...

 

[26Mats]

Romanov and Brook better pan out because it sure looks like Timmins doesn't have much to show for as far as this decade of drafting D's goes. Starting to look like the Detroit Red Wings and their "amazing" reputation of drafting and developing lol

It WAS starting to look like that before this recent wave. He then started drafting for size. I was not happy to see that he drafted for need this last draft (left D's). Not sure it was his decision or Bergevin's.

But yes this recent wave will determine his legacy. At least he's not drafting for size and language (Tinordi, McCarron, DLR, Leblanc, etc..)

 

[PecnoTrunk]

Timmins will be with Tony in about an hour.

18 years in the organization drafting and in those 18 years we won 2 conference titles

That is 11% winning

That’s an awful record

Let’s see how many coolaid drinkers there are on this canadiens forum. The Timmons supporters

If you perform 11% at your work I’m sure you get fired. No ?

 

[Habs]

Interesting reminder of how many of those players who attend development camps may not make it.

More proof Timmins is a complete failure at his job, and his boss is a total tool for not making changes to the scouting, especially in the west.

 

[26Mats]

Interesting reminder of how many of those players who attend development camps may not make it.

True, but that was a terrible era. This, imo, is a good one. Maybe less high end prospects than the Price, Subban, McDonagh, Pacioretty, etc... era, but imo perhaps more very, very good ones. Let's see a list from that era...

 

[26Mats]

More proof Timmins is a complete failure at his job, and his boss is a total tool for not making changes to the scouting, especially in the west.

all that list proves is that era was a failure. Need a complete list to judge a scout. Not a snapshot of the worst part.

 

[Garbageyuk]

Galchenyuk was ranked higher than all of them on almost every list.

You are were knowingly lying and punching well out of your weight class with me.

Welcome to my ignore list

lol, you are delusional. 3/5 of the sources I posted had him ranked outside the top 3. Two had him out of the top 5. Who's lying? Besides, I thought the confusion was that you were talking about hfboards and I was talking about scouts, but here you are talking about scout's lists. Now I know you've only been looking for conflict and not any kind of discussion.

 

[A55P2]

lol, you are delusional. 3/5 of the sources I posted had him ranked outside the top 3. Two had him out of the top 5. Who's lying? Besides, I thought the confusion was that you were talking about hfboards and I was talking about scouts, but here you are talking about scout's lists. Now I know you've only been looking for conflict and not any kind of discussion.

Him at 14 is such an outlier lol! From what I can remember, he was hurt for most of his draft year so some teams may have opted out of drafting him at 3, but a lot of people were also saying that had he not been hurt he could have been drafted 1st overall. Most players in this draft were also closer in terms of quality than in some other drafts, so it wasn't that clear who was going 3rd but he was the frontrunner even if by a slim margin.

I'm not sure you answered that question yet, but you have to if you want to be taken seriously. We're you already following the draft at that time?

 

[Garbageyuk]

It took 5-6 years before the Galchenyuk pick really looked that questionable. It was unanimously the correct pick 4 years after the draft so I would say it was a good pick that didn't work out solely due to the player developing attitude problems that were not at all evident in 2012.

Price was a different story as he was expected to go closer to 10th but that wasn't the actual issue. The problem wasn't with Price as a prospect it was that we had a Hart trophy winner and one of the top goaltending prospects in the game at the time (Theodore, Garon). There didn't appear to be any sense in selecting a goalie when we appeared to be as stacked as any team in that regard.

My problem with the previous poster was that he was making false claims about players being ranked ahead of Galchenyuk and Timmins reaching for the pick.

For the record I, possibly more than anyone don't hold these rankings in high regard. I usually give far more weight to Timmins and company than these silly rankings made by people who aren't good enough to be hired as scouts in the first place. Unfortunately the only comparative we have to establish consensus rankings are these independent lists. It would be great if every team posted their priority list after the draft but that will never happen and for good reason.

two of the sources I linked to were NHL's Central Scouting, and ISS. The two most renowned scouting services in the world. Literally professional scouting organizations. Both had him outside the top 3. You are unbelievable.

 

[David Suzuki]

If you perform 11% at your work I’m sure you get fired. No ?

This comparison implies every other scout is hitting on 100 percent of their picks

 

[Garbageyuk]

Him at 14 is such an outlier lol! From what I can remember, he was hurt for most of his draft year so some teams may have opted out of drafting him at 3, but a lot of people were also saying that had he not been hurt he could have been drafted 1st overall. Most players in this draft were also closer in terms of quality than in some other drafts, so it wasn't that clear who was going 3rd but he was the frontrunner even if by a slim margin.

I'm not sure you answered that question yet, but you have to if you want to be taken seriously. We're you already following the draft at that time?

All I ever claimed was that there was no consensus among scouts as to him being rated in the top 3 - plenty had him outside it, and a lot of scouts had significant doubts about him from day 1. The link I provided supports it. I'm sorry if that makes people mad, but it's the truth.

 

[PecnoTrunk]

This comparison implies every other scout is hitting on 100 percent of their picks

Not really , this implies that if you were in university that score would put you in the “Animal House” category lol

 

[A55P2]

All I ever claimed was that there was no consensus among scouts as to him being rated in the top 3 - plenty had him outside it, and a lot of scouts had significant doubts about him from day 1. The link I provided supports it. I'm sorry if that makes people mad, but it's the truth.

The whole draft had questions marks, which in retrospect was very fair, I'll give you that.

 

[PecnoTrunk]

All I ever claimed was that there was no consensus among scouts as to him being rated in the top 3 - plenty had him outside it, and a lot of scouts had significant doubts about him from day 1. The link I provided supports it. I'm sorry if that makes people mad, but it's the truth.

Was that the year Timmons let Reilly / Trouba / Ceci goooo? Yes Timon’s is to blame. They picked by position and not BPA

We need to always pick best player available. Trade them later if need be. But always BPA

 

[Habs]

all that list proves is that era was a failure. Need a complete list to judge a scout. Not a snapshot of the worst part.

Take a look since then, do we have 5 players that made the NHL ? That's quite the success lol

 

[26Mats]

Take a look since then, do we have 5 players that made the NHL ? That's quite the success lol

can't judge a draft even a few years after it. But all the recent drafts look good so far

2015: Juulsen
2016: Sergachev, Mete
2017: Poehling, Brook, Primeau (plus Fleury and Ikonen)
2018: Kotkaniemi, Romanov, Ylonen, (plus Harris, McShane, Fonstad)
2019: Caufield, Struble, etc...

And yes, we have more than 5 players from the 4 drafts that have played in the NHL - so far (Juulsen, Sergachev, Mete, Poehling, Kotkaniemi). And they all look like top 4 D or top 6/9 forwards.