Trevor Timmins Discussion (Part V)

[Merci Saku]

Thats why I say TT took a great talent. But in the grand scheme of things the habs would of been better off trading down grabbing Kopi and Quick/Bishop. The trading down part goes hand in hand with the whole 9 teams skipping him.

Price is great, but outside of his 1 heart/Vezna season is there really anything he has done that a Quick/Rask/Bishop couldn't have?

TT got the right talent. But looking at that draft there were 3 goalies and 1 center available that would of made a lot more sense overall. If someone was an amazing scout they would of seen this. An average scout wouldn't have. Sure if we drafted Brule and didn't pick up Bishop/Quick in the 3rd round it would of been an epic fail along the lines of 04/06 so I have to give TT credit for selecting an amazing talent. BPA for sure.

But in the grand scheme of things, and this teams need for Centers, I put this up there with 06 and missing Giroux and 10 missing Kuznetsov.

Price on another team would be treated like an all star by Habs fans. We got a great goalie here, enjoy him! Put Rask/Quick/Bishop in his place here, you sure it’s a success?

Talking about Quick and Bishop like you know how good they were going to be

They were gambles then and nobody would have predicted their career. Even Bishop took years to develop

An amazing scout would have seen this? Yeah sure all 30 teams are idiots by passing Quick and Bishop so many rounds

I hate when so called fans say things like that, like the draft is an exact science

 

[Hacketts]

Well my thing with the Price pick is, great player, but wrong pick. TT got the talent right, but would things be that different if we drafted Bishop or Quick? And who knows where Rask goes if the habs don't take Price.

Which is another point both Rask and Bishop were traded. So not only could we have drafted them, we also had a chance to get them on the trade market.

Habs trade down, pick Kopi at 8/9/10, get a 2nd rounder or whatever, take Quick/Bishop (or maybe Rask) and that sounds pretty damn good.

Would of taken a lot of attention, forsight, and thought when looking at the draft. It was a good draft for goalies, but IMO there wasn't a need to take one with the 5th pick.

Man, you can't be serious.

Anytime you draft a player that's going in the HHOF, you can't say it's the wrong pick.

 

[scrubadam]

Price on another team would be treated like an all star by Habs fans. We got a great goalie here, enjoy him! Put Rask/Quick/Bishop in his place here, you sure it’s a success?

Talking about Quick and Bishop like you know how good they were going to be

They were gambles then and nobody would have predicted their career. Even Bishop took years to develop

An amazing scout would have seen this? Yeah sure all 30 teams are idiots by passing Quick and Bishop so many rounds

I hate when so called fans say things like that, like the draft is an exact science

Well scouts are paid the big pucks to predict these things.

And put Rask/Quick/Bishop in Prices place and I think its as much a success for the TEAM as we had with Price.

What did Price get us one ECF in which he was injured the 1st game? Halak brough the team to the ECF with Gomez as his 1C.

Not talking individual awards here, I am talking about the team. Its not like we have been perenial contenders with Price in nets. Give us Rask/Quick/Bishop and I am sure this team makes the playoffs most of the time and maybe wins a round or 2.

With hindsight the habs would of been better off with drafting Kopi against Price IMO. As a TEAM. I am not looking at Price's individual accomplishments. And heck maybe with no Price this team tanks a bit more and we wind up with a few more top 5 picks.

Draft isn't an exact science, but you have to judge a draft with hindsight. Scouts are paid to make the right gambles. A great scout will hit them. That draft had 4 great goalies taken. There was plenty of chances to land a top level goalie without using the 5th overall pick.

 

[dcyhabs]

If you find anyone who can predict the player who will grow a few inches or improve his skating, or pick up his game over the next few years make sure the habs hire him. I haven't noticed a team that consistently gets it right, have you? Top few picks are money, some of the better teams get value out of late first round picks at least in part because they are willing to wait longer for the return because they don't suck at draft time, after that it's a crapshoot. I've been looking for a team that makes better decisions, Chicago does pretty well, but generally each year top 10 picks do well, several other first rounders do well, and a few other guys. Boston has had some good picks, Chicago seems to have at least one every year, other than that it varies. Timmins seems to be doing better lately...

 

[dcyhabs]

Well scouts are paid the big pucks to predict these things.

And put Rask/Quick/Bishop in Prices place and I think its as much a success for the TEAM as we had with Price.

What did Price get us one ECF in which he was injured the 1st game? Halak brough the team to the ECF with Gomez as his 1C.

Not talking individual awards here, I am talking about the team. Its not like we have been perenial contenders with Price in nets. Give us Rask/Quick/Bishop and I am sure this team makes the playoffs most of the time and maybe wins a round or 2.

With hindsight the habs would of been better off with drafting Kopi against Price IMO. As a TEAM. I am not looking at Price's individual accomplishments. And heck maybe with no Price this team tanks a bit more and we wind up with a few more top 5 picks.

Draft isn't an exact science, but you have to judge a draft with hindsight. Scouts are paid to make the right gambles. A great scout will hit them. That draft had 4 great goalies taken. There was plenty of chances to land a top level goalie without using the 5th overall pick.

But no team took more than one of those goalies. LA drafted well for a while, Chicago, Boston, but they've all had some brutal misses, too. You are judging the habs with hindsight and they failed to take the best players so they have crap scouts. Try doing the same for other teams. Only a few teams end up not looking totally inept in hindsight and it is not the same teams every year. Chicago seems to at least find one late round player every year the last several years so I guess they suck less. The best player at 18 is not necessarily the best player at 25 outside the top 1-5 picks depending on the year. Some drafts have very few good players. A scout who finds one good player outside the first round is good.

If you can find a scout who consistently finds late round gems hire him/her. Good luck finding him/her.

I suspect part of the problem is that teams hire ex-players with few non-hockey skills and ignore the guys who do deeper analyses. Canadian teams don't win cups because they have access to the old school guys who get respect but who don't actually have any ability outside of playing. The sharks, hawks, kings, have been doing moneyball pretty successfully. Washington is all over the place, Pittsburgh lucked out with top picks, Carolina only won because of officiating (Justin Williams is allowed to hit guys in the head with his stick, why?), Boston was uneven but they've had some great picks... The old school teams who can hire the people they want tend to suck.

Lesson: get some advanced stats guys. Listen to them. Forget intangibles because you can't measure them. Work to integrate locker room "cancers" like Kessel, Hamilton, Subban, because they are good and it's easier to convince mediocre players to deal with them than to find better. Search all leagues. Value higher picks (trade down but only after the good known players are gone, was that at 50 this year? We'll know 5 years out) high and quantity after. Pick the high scorers because scoring is one of the few draft metrics that consistently matters (with the exception of small, slow guys). Timmins seems to be doing this the last few years. I'm on board.

 

[Chili]

But no team took more than one of those goalies. LA drafted well for a while, Chicago, Boston, but they've all had some brutal misses, too. You are judging the habs with hindsight and they failed to take the best players so they have crap scouts. Try doing the same for other teams. Only a few teams end up not looking totally inept in hindsight and it is not the same teams every year. Chicago seems to at least find one late round player every year the last several years so I guess they suck less. The best player at 18 is not necessarily the best player at 25 outside the top 1-5 picks depending on the year. Some drafts have very few good players. A scout who finds one good player outside the first round is good.

If you can find a scout who consistently finds late round gems hire him/her. Good luck finding him/her.

I suspect part of the problem is that teams hire ex-players with few non-hockey skills and ignore the guys who do deeper analyses. Canadian teams don't win cups because they have access to the old school guys who get respect but who don't actually have any ability outside of playing. The sharks, hawks, kings, have been doing moneyball pretty successfully. Washington is all over the place, Pittsburgh lucked out with top picks, Carolina only won because of officiating (Justin Williams is allowed to hit guys in the head with his stick, why?), Boston was uneven but they've had some great picks... The old school teams who can hire the people they want tend to suck.

Lesson: get some advanced stats guys. Listen to them. Forget intangibles because you can't measure them. Work to integrate locker room "cancers" like Kessel, Hamilton, Subban, because they are good and it's easier to convince mediocre players to deal with them than to find better. Search all leagues. Value higher picks (trade down but only after the good known players are gone, was that at 50 this year? We'll know 5 years out) high and quantity after. Pick the high scorers because scoring is one of the few draft metrics that consistently matters (with the exception of small, slow guys). Timmins seems to be doing this the last few years. I'm on board.

The Hockey News printed stats that showed the Pens found more players after the second round who played 100 or more NHL games from 2000-2018 than any other team. It takes more then a couple of players to win the cup, depth is critical and they have drafted well.

 

[Miller Time]

The Hockey News printed stats that showed the Pens found more players after the second round who played 100 or more NHL games from 2000-2018 than any other team. It takes more then a couple of players to win the cup, depth is critical and they have drafted well.

I wonder how much that has been affected by the "luxury" of being able to largely ignore scouting time & energy and hockeyops attention &on focus on the always much hyped top 15-20 picks in the draft from ~2007 onwards?
In 12yrs, They've only had 1 pick inside the top 20 in that span (plus 6x @20-23), and 6x they didn't pick in the first 40...

Wonder if the ability to devote more energy & attention outside of first round prospects has contributed to their success at scouting NHL talent later in the draft?

 

[dcyhabs]

I wonder how much that has been affected by the "luxury" of being able to largely ignore scouting time & energy and hockeyops attention &on focus on the always much hyped top 15-20 picks in the draft from ~2007 onwards?
In 12yrs, They've only had 1 pick inside the top 20 in that span (plus 6x @20-23), and 6x they didn't pick in the first 40...

Wonder if the ability to devote more energy & attention outside of first round prospects has contributed to their success at scouting NHL talent later in the draft?

Plus being able to put those drafted players with Malkin, Crosby, with Lemieux mentoring... But good point chili, they have been consistent.

The good teams get a bounce out of the late first round picks so there is a benefit to ignoring the hype and/or not needing the guy to play in the next year or two.

I agree the Penguins do well, but they do well to find one guy a year for 8 years. No one is coming close to making good picks consistently.

 

[Whitesnake]

All this AHO drama puts in perspective the supposed great pick that is Noah Juulsen.....

 

[scrubadam]

No scout bats 100. Of course not, every team has misses. The point though is to judge TT. I bet those teams with misses fire their scout at some point, TT has been here since 03, thats 16 years.

That gives us plenty to judge, and I just looked at his 1st round where we should be hitting out of the park.

Price/Max/McD/Serge/AG. Thats his 1st round work for 16 years.

AG is nothing special but the draft sucked. Still plenty of D and Forsberg there.

Price great player, but 3 great goalies taken in that draft, 2 in the 3rd round. Kopi the C we have been looking for for 25 years.

So if we want to say TT is an average scout or medicore fine I agree. But if we pump his tires as some amazing scout while then we can't use excuse of other teams miss or no scout is perfect.

TT is good at getting D, but sucks at forwards. Giroux, Kuznetzov, Carter, Kopi, thats 4 C's that he could of drafted over the last 16 years and he didn't get one of em.

 

[26Mats]

All this AHO drama puts in perspective the supposed great pick that is Noah Juulsen.....

Marc Bergevin and Trevor Timmins were on record saying Bergevin told Timmins to "get me a defenseman" in the first round.

This Aho drama really shows how you have to take the best player available every draft. I didn't like when we were targeting left D this past draft. Struble looks great. But did we miss out on another Aho???

 

[26Mats]

No scout bats 100. Of course not, every team has misses. The point though is to judge TT. I bet those teams with misses fire their scout at some point, TT has been here since 03, thats 16 years.

That gives us plenty to judge, and I just looked at his 1st round where we should be hitting out of the park.

Price/Max/McD/Serge/AG. Thats his 1st round work for 16 years.

AG is nothing special but the draft sucked. Still plenty of D and Forsberg there.

Price great player, but 3 great goalies taken in that draft, 2 in the 3rd round. Kopi the C we have been looking for for 25 years.

So if we want to say TT is an average scout or medicore fine I agree. But if we pump his tires as some amazing scout while then we can't use excuse of other teams miss or no scout is perfect.

TT is good at getting D, but sucks at forwards. Giroux, Kuznetzov, Carter, Kopi, thats 4 C's that he could of drafted over the last 16 years and he didn't get one of em.

"Price/Max/McD/Serge/AG. Thats his 1st round work for 16 years."

Ever heard of Caufield, Kotkaniemi, Poehling, and Juulsen???

 

[Whitesnake]

Marc Bergevin and Trevor Timmins were on record saying Bergevin told Timmins to "get me a defenseman" in the first round.

This Aho drama really shows how you have to take the best player available every draft. I didn't like when we were targeting left D this past draft. Struble looks great. But did we miss out on another Aho???

Trevor Timmins should have told Bergevin that there were none interesting in the 1st round and that someobdy else was. And I keep saying enough with the needs. But who am I,....

 

[26Mats]

Trevor Timmins should have told Bergevin that there were none interesting in the 1st round and that someobdy else was. And I keep saying enough with the needs. But who am I,....

I agree that Timmins should have pleaded with him, if he had Aho on his radar. But sometimes when your boss tells you to do something, that's the way it is. All reports indicated Timmins pleaded with Gainey not to include McDonagh in the Gomez trade...

All I can see is the drafting is looking really good the last 3 years. Of course we'll have to wait and see what actually becomes of these players. But let's hope Timmins can keep it up over the next few years, because he's not going anywhere. He's smoking hot right now - or at least perceived as so.

 

[scrubadam]

"Price/Max/McD/Serge/AG. Thats his 1st round work for 16 years."

Ever heard of Caufield, Kotkaniemi, Poehling, and Juulsen???

Too early to judge those players. At one time we thought Beau was the next Markov and Tinordi the next Chara.

when those players become more than the TT special we can include them.

The drafting seems better but we can't judge just yet.

 

[26Mats]

Too early to judge those players. At one time we thought Beau was the next Markov and Tinordi the next Chara.

when those players become more than the TT special we can include them.

The drafting seems better but we can't judge just yet.

Then don't say that's all he has to show in 16 years, if you're not going to include the most recent years. It's misleading.

 

[scrubadam]

Then don't say that's all he has to show in 16 years, if you're not going to include the most recent years. It's misleading.

Ok fine thats all he has to show for 12 years!

Doesn't make it any better, especially when he could of got us Kopi/Carter/Giroux/Kuznetzov. Any one of those would of solved our C problem.

 

[26Mats]

Ok fine thats all he has to show for 12 years!

Doesn't make it any better, especially when he could of got us Kopi/Carter/Giroux/Kuznetzov. Any one of those would of solved our C problem.

Well now we have Kotkaniemi and Poheling.

Plus Chucky turned into Domi. We don't get Domi if we have the bozo scout that drafted Yakupov, Ryan Murray, or Griffin Reinhart.

 

[EXPOS123]

You know, we all say (and rightfully so) how the Roy trade set us back years (not to mention the Gomez and Subban trade, but that's a topic for another day).

But the more i think of it, the more i am convinced that taking Andrei Kostitsyn in 2003 has had just as major of a negative impact.

That draft was the greatest in history, nearly every one picked in the first round became a franchise player....except for us.

I mean, just think of the players we passed up on -, Geztlaf, Burns Seabrook, Carter, Perry, Richards, Parise, etc....and its' really sad.

Yes, i get that at the time Andrei was considered a risky but high reward pick, but with so much surer talent around, why did they have to take that chance?

it was not necessary.

We could have been set at #1 center or d for the next decade, instead we've been trying to fill that hole to this day.

How Timmins kept his job after that is a mystery.

 

[scrubadam]

You know, we all say (and rightfully so) how the Roy trade set us back years (not to mention the Gomez and Subban trade, but that's a topic for another day).

But the more i think of it, the more i am convinced that taking Andrei Kostitsyn in 2003 has had just as major of a negative impact.

That draft was the greatest in history, nearly every one picked in the first round became a franchise player....except for us.

I mean, just think of the players we passed up on -, Geztlaf, Burns Seabrook, Carter, Perry, Richards, Parise, etc....and its' really sad.

Yes, i get that at the time Andrei was considered a risky but high reward pick, but with so much surer talent around, why did they have to take that chance?

it was not necessary.

We could have been set at #1 center or d for the next decade, instead we've been trying to fill that hole to this day.

How Timmins kept his job after that is a mystery.

I think Fischer over Giroux is worse.

We are talking about a C who is .92 PPG for his career with a 90 and 100 point season.

Fischer was a gigantic bust.

Trading up for Tinordi of Kuznetzov is a close second. .77PPG C with 2 70 point seasons and one 80 point season.

 

[montreal]

All this AHO drama puts in perspective the supposed great pick that is Noah Juulsen.....

they went safe after taking a risky 1st round in '14 in Scherbak, plus it's not like out Swedish/Finnish scouts were doing so hot. Up until Kotka we have nothing to show from Sweden/Finland for a long time going back way before Timmins. It's a shame as both programs along with the US have been on the rise to become the best after Canada.

Juulsen was a solid pick at the time and as long as his injuries don't impact him he should be a very solid NHLer imo.

Trevor Timmins should have told Bergevin that there were none interesting in the 1st round and that someobdy else was. And I keep saying enough with the needs. But who am I,....

who's to say he didn't, we have no clue what has been said to MB and how much he listens.

You know, we all say (and rightfully so) how the Roy trade set us back years (not to mention the Gomez and Subban trade, but that's a topic for another day).

But the more i think of it, the more i am convinced that taking Andrei Kostitsyn in 2003 has had just as major of a negative impact.

That draft was the greatest in history, nearly every one picked in the first round became a franchise player....except for us.

I mean, just think of the players we passed up on -, Geztlaf, Burns Seabrook, Carter, Perry, Richards, Parise, etc....and its' really sad.

Yes, i get that at the time Andrei was considered a risky but high reward pick, but with so much surer talent around, why did they have to take that chance?

it was not necessary.

We could have been set at #1 center or d for the next decade, instead we've been trying to fill that hole to this day.

How Timmins kept his job after that is a mystery.

Kostitsyn in any other year wouldn't have been a bad pick per say, with 3 20+ goal/ 40+ pt seasons but in that draft it looks much worse. That said it could have been Jessiman who went 2 spots later and played a total of 2 NHL games. There's Zherdev at 4th OA who was only slightly better production. Bernier barely outproduced AK, Nilsson only had half the points, Fehr with the same production as AK all taken a few spots after Jessiman. Then there's the later 1st like Belle, MAP, Tambellini, Stewart who all did very little.

So how much did it set back all those organizations? It could be worse, the yotes didn't get even ONE NHL game from the ENTIRE draft. One of the greatest drafts in NHL history and they don't get a single player to play a single NHL game.

That said we don't know how much impact the GM had either. Savard was a former scout and was Timmins boss with the Sens if I recall correctly, he's the one who brought Timmins in here. So you have a rookie head scout working for his former boss. Savard was gushing over Urquhart at the draft talking about his hands and the playoffs he just had for the rocket. So many at the time felt it was his pick over Timmins. If they go with Bergeron or Weber instead of Urquhart then it really would have changed the face of the franchise.

But have you ever asked yourself why 4 GM's haven't fired him? So fans on a message board, that we all can easily admit we just don't know what goes on behind closed doors as to who is saying what on each pick/prospect. So we clearly don't have all the facts, yet 4 GM's instead of firing him he's been promoted time and again. Why? Are all 4 GM's just too stupid to see the problem or is it something else, that maybe because out of the 200+ draft picks every year that so few go on to be solid NHLers or better and that Timmins over his span with the Habs has indeed found enough either for us or were traded as no fault to himself or used to bring in quality assets in trades that they felt he was doing a more then solid job for us.

I look at scouting like baseball, you are paid to fail, because most of the time you will fail. For any NHL fan, if you want to look smart just bash all your teams prospects drafted outside say the top 10 or 20. You will be right a lot more then you are wrong and that goes for every team. Even the best make some really stupid decisions at the draft table.

 

[EXPOS123]

they went safe after taking a risky 1st round in '14 in Scherbak, plus it's not like out Swedish/Finnish scouts were doing so hot. Up until Kotka we have nothing to show from Sweden/Finland for a long time going back way before Timmins. It's a shame as both programs along with the US have been on the rise to become the best after Canada.

Juulsen was a solid pick at the time and as long as his injuries don't impact him he should be a very solid NHLer imo.



who's to say he didn't, we have no clue what has been said to MB and how much he listens.




Kostitsyn in any other year wouldn't have been a bad pick per say, with 3 20+ goal/ 40+ pt seasons but in that draft it looks much worse. That said it could have been Jessiman who went 2 spots later and played a total of 2 NHL games. There's Zherdev at 4th OA who was only slightly better production. Bernier barely outproduced AK, Nilsson only had half the points, Fehr with the same production as AK all taken a few spots after Jessiman. Then there's the later 1st like Belle, MAP, Tambellini, Stewart who all did very little.

So how much did it set back all those organizations? It could be worse, the yotes didn't get even ONE NHL game from the ENTIRE draft. One of the greatest drafts in NHL history and they don't get a single player to play a single NHL game.

That said we don't know how much impact the GM had either. Savard was a former scout and was Timmins boss with the Sens if I recall correctly, he's the one who brought Timmins in here. So you have a rookie head scout working for his former boss. Savard was gushing over Urquhart at the draft talking about his hands and the playoffs he just had for the rocket. So many at the time felt it was his pick over Timmins. If they go with Bergeron or Weber instead of Urquhart then it really would have changed the face of the franchise.

But have you ever asked yourself why 4 GM's haven't fired him? So fans on a message board, that we all can easily admit we just don't know what goes on behind closed doors as to who is saying what on each pick/prospect. So we clearly don't have all the facts, yet 4 GM's instead of firing him he's been promoted time and again. Why? Are all 4 GM's just too stupid to see the problem or is it something else, that maybe because out of the 200+ draft picks every year that so few go on to be solid NHLers or better and that Timmins over his span with the Habs has indeed found enough either for us or were traded as no fault to himself or used to bring in quality assets in trades that they felt he was doing a more then solid job for us.

I look at scouting like baseball, you are paid to fail, because most of the time you will fail. For any NHL fan, if you want to look smart just bash all your teams prospects drafted outside say the top 10 or 20. You will be right a lot more then you are wrong and that goes for every team. Even the best make some really stupid decisions at the draft table.

I get what you're saying, but i don't really care what the other teams did. If i were a fan of those teams that drafted busts that year, i would be saying the same thing about their scouting.

I still maintain it was an unecesary risky pick at the time and that draft specifically - there weren't just 2 or 3 better players we passed over, there were literally 10-15 franchise altering players still available at #10. Instead, we drafted a guy who was out of the league by the age of 28. Imagine if we had any one of the following

Jeff Carter

Dustin Brown

Brent Seabrook

Ryan Getzlaf

Brent Burns

Ryan Kesler

Mike Richards

Corey Perry

Zach Parise

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[montreal]

I get what you're saying, but i don't really care what the other teams did. If i were a fan of those teams that drafted busts that year, i would be saying the same thing about their scouting.

I still maintain it was an unecesary risky pick at the time and that draft specifically - there weren't just 2 or 3 better players we passed over, there were literally 10-15 franchise altering players still available at #10. Instead, we drafted a guy who was out of the league by the age of 28. Imagine if we had any one of the following

Jeff Carter

Dustin Brown

Brent Seabrook

Ryan Getzlaf

Brent Burns

Ryan Kesler

Mike Richards

Corey Perry

Zach Parise

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

clearly would have been much better, but it's a two way street with the what ifs. what if he drafts Brule instead of Price, Palushaj instead of Subban, Reinhart instead of Galchenyuk, Jost instead of Sergachev, etc... every one of those were the very next pick after Timmins.

So he didn't get a better player, in his first year it didn't go as well as it should have. Halak was a great find, Lappy a solid 4th liner, AK was a solid player for a time. Most years that would be a solid draft for sure.

Again though, why do you think 4 GM's haven't fired him and instead he's gone from head scout to director of scouting to assistant GM?

 

[EXPOS123]

clearly would have been much better, but it's a two way street with the what ifs. what if he drafts Brule instead of Price, Palushaj instead of Subban, Reinhart instead of Galchenyuk, Jost instead of Sergachev, etc... every one of those were the very next pick after Timmins.

So he didn't get a better player, in his first year it didn't go as well as it should have. Halak was a great find, Lappy a solid 4th liner, AK was a solid player for a time. Most years that would be a solid draft for sure.

Again though, why do you think 4 GM's haven't fired him and instead he's gone from head scout to director of scouting to assistant GM?

That's what i've been trying to figure out.

 

[26Mats]

I'm real disappointed with what Timmins has done lately. Let's fire him.

2016: Sergachev, Mete
2017: Poehling, Brook, Primeau, Fleury, Ikonen
2018: Kotkaniemi, Romanov, Ylonen, Harris, etc..
2019: Caufield, Struble, Fairbrother, Pitlick, etc...

We're rated as one of the best prospect pools in the league...