Who built the team that we have today?

[Treb]

Let's see

Patches (Gainey/Timmins)
DD (Carbonneau/ Gainey)
PAP (Bergevin)
Chuckie (Bergevin/Timmins)
Plek (Savard)
Gallagher (Gainey, but mostly Timmins)
Bourque (Gauthier)
Eller (Gauthier)
Sekac (Bergevin)
Bournival (Bergevin) ----> Edit Gauthier, sorry
Prust (Bergevin)
Malhotra (Bergevin)
Weise (Bergevin)
Moen (Gainey)

Subban (Gainey/Timmins)
Markov (Houle)
Emelin (Gainey)
Gilbert (Bergevin)
Tinordi (Gauthier/Timmins)
Weaver (Bergevin)
Beaulieu (Gauthier/Timmins)

Price ( Gainey/Timmins)
Tokarski (Bergevin)
Budaj (Gauthier)

So
Bergevin: 10 ---> 9
Timmins: 7
Gainey: 7
Gauthier: 5 ---> 6
Carbonneau: 1
Savard: 1
Houle:1

Pretty sure it is Bergevin's team now, mostly. Especially since most of the guys brought in by other GM were re-signed by him.

 

[Mr Jackpot]

Timmins is consistently ranked the number one scout or among the top few in the NHL, that is in fact enough to ask for.

just curious do you have any links on that? I tried googling "best nhl scouts" but no luck.

 

[LastWordArmy]

Bottom line

A. Savard legacy : Timmins + Plekanec. Successful transition from a completely DEAD roster he inherited from Houle.
Gainey's legacy : Losing us McDo, letting Koivu go for nothing, leaving Gauthier in charge.

Horrible.

There is a little bit of cherry picking going on here.... picking the best of one and the worst of the other.

- You seem to forget about getting a first round pick (Pacioretty) and Gorges for Rivet? along with many other moves.
- Getting Kovalev for basically nothing (Balej and a 2nd who ended up a bust).

Also you can't credit all of Timmins picks to Savard. Every year there is an organizational review of all departments and Scouting is assessed and decisions made, at what point do contract renewals become part of the new GM and not the old one?? How many years was Timmins signed for originally?? Did Gainey renew the deal?


Every GM has good and bad moves, you can't just pick the good of one and the bad of the other and call that the end of the evaluation.

Evaluate all of the moves, and yeah, you might be right that Gainey was worse than Savard, but doing it on this cherry picked basis doesn't prove much.

 

[DAChampion]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the Gomez-Mcdo trade at the time was a very good NHL center vs a decent prospect. Years later it turned out to be a very poor center vs a Norris candidate.

You're wrong.

Gomez was a mediocre offensive centre on a terrible contract, McDonagh was a bluechip prospect and Higgins an effective middle-six forward.

Did the Washington Capitals ever acquire Chris Drury for John Carlson? Did Boston ever acquire Daniel Briere for Dougie Hamilton? If not, why not?

 

[LastWordArmy]

Come on 500 isn't to much to ask in this case.
These guys were not no names they were ticketed as Elite well before their draft years.
Then we had to go through the pain of watching them light it up on the world stage while Gord kept saying the Bruins are gonna love him abd the flyers are gonna love him. Totally pisses me off to have Two French Quebecer's going to THOSE organizations. They both own more than we do....

If they were so elite why did 44 other picks not take Bergeron?

Why did it take 22 picks to get Giroux?

Not quite as easy as you make it out to be.

 

[Mr Jackpot]

What about when we finish first in our conference in 07-08 (first time in 20 years) and then next summer Gainey went on to acquire Tanguay, Lang and Laraque, no one's talking about that. You cherry picker you.

 

[DAChampion]

just curious do you have any links on that? I tried googling "best nhl scouts" but no luck.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=team+with+best+drafting+in+the+NHL

Specifically:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2104441-ranking-the-10-best-drafting-teams-in-the-nhl/page/11

 

[Mr Jackpot]

You're wrong.

Gomez was a mediocre offensive centre on a terrible contract, McDonagh was a bluechip prospect and Higgins an effective middle-six forward.

Did the Washington Capitals ever acquire Chris Drury for John Carlson? Did Boston ever acquire Daniel Briere for Dougie Hamilton? If not, why not?

ok I was wrong, thanks for clarifying.

 

[Analyzer*]

Bournival (Bergevin)

He's not a Bergevin acquisition.

 

[Shadow Journal]

You're wrong.

Gomez was a mediocre offensive centre on a terrible contract, McDonagh was a bluechip prospect and Higgins an effective middle-six forward.

I remember when news of the trade first broke, before I heard that McDonagh was involved, I was annoyed – Gomez was a clearly a few steps below some of the centres we were rumoured to be after, and I didn't think it solved our problem at all; additionally, I couldn't figure out why we would want to help a team in our conference unload an awful contract. I was just confused and annoyed.

Then when I heard that McDonagh was added I was livid. I thought that, if anything, the Rangers should have to sweeten the pot to get us to take on that insane contract.

 

[DAChampion]

I remember when news of the trade first broke, before I heard that McDonagh was involved, I was annoyed – Gomez was a clearly a few steps below some of the centres we were rumoured to be after, and I didn't think it solved our problem at all; additionally, I couldn't figure out why we would want to help a team in our conference unload an awful contract. I was just confused and annoyed.

Then when I heard that McDonagh was added I was livid. I thought that, if anything, the Rangers should have to sweeten the pot to get us to take on that insane contract.

If you look back on the HF boards thread from the trade, it's possibly the angriest thread in the history of the team. There was an ironclad consensus that this was a dumb trade.

 

[Scriptor]

There's no arguing the Gomez trade was a dumb trade, especially once 20/20 hindsight clearly confirmed it, rubbing in the point as we see how well MacDonagh developed.

As far as Timmins being consistently considered one of the best Pro Scouts in all sports, it's a little exaggerated…

Timmins is a good scout but, has proven to be a safe scout, even in the later rounds, where other scouts try and swing for home runs with a greater risk/reward ratio than Timmins does or has.

That said, Timmins will draft more players that will MAKE the NHL, over the long haul, than many other hockey scouts. However, barring exceptions (like Subban) or an extremely high pick (like Galchenyuk), the likelihood of a 4th or 5th round pick developing into a star player under Timmins' watch is rather remote.

Love Timmins myself. Perhaps, however, the love fest from some on this board is a little over the top…..

 

[LastWordArmy]

Timmins is a good scout but, has proven to be a safe scout, even in the later rounds, where other scouts try and swing for home runs with a greater risk/reward ratio than Timmins does or has.

Avtsin, Pribyl, and Trunev were all home run swings.... yes he missed, but they were swinging for the fences.

Gallagher looks like a home run based on where he was drafted.

Nygren wasn't a "safe pick"... and could turn out.

Audette and Reway are home run swings... we'll see if they work.

Going further back, there have been some later round home runs... Halak was a home run. Sergei Kostitsyn could have been a home run if not for his attitude. Mark Streit was a home run. Mikhail Grabovski was a home run (even if not for us, thats not Timmins fault).

How has 5 better players 5th round or later than Gallagher, S. Kostitsyn, Mikhail Grabovski, Mark Streit and Jaro Halak? Anyone??

The only other player we've gotten 5th round or later who managed 100 NHL games was Matt D'agostini, so I'm not sure that he goes with a lot of safe picks late in the draft.

Heck the whole idea that there are even "safe picks" available late in the draft is flawed IMO.

 

[Sorinth]

Let's see

Patches (Gainey/Timmins)
DD (Carbonneau/ Gainey)
PAP (Bergevin)
Chuckie (Bergevin/Timmins)
Plek (Savard)
Gallagher (Gainey, but mostly Timmins)
Bourque (Gauthier)
Eller (Gauthier)
Sekac (Bergevin)
Bournival (Bergevin)
Prust (Bergevin)
Malhotra (Bergevin)
Weise (Bergevin)
Moen (Gainey)

Subban (Gainey/Timmins)
Markov (Houle)
Emelin (Gainey)
Gilbert (Bergevin)
Tinordi (Gauthier/Timmins)
Weaver (Bergevin)
Beaulieu (Gauthier/Timmins)

Price ( Gainey/Timmins)
Tokarski (Bergevin)
Budaj (Gauthier)

So
Bergevin: 10
Timmins: 7
Gainey: 7
Gauthier: 5
Carbonneau: 1
Savard: 1
Houle:1

Pretty sure it is Bergevin's team now, mostly. Especially since most of the guys brought in by other GM were re-signed by him.

I'm not sure how you can really say it's Bergevin's team using that kind of a list. First going purely from that list only one top-6 forward, one top-4 defenceman, and the 3rd string goalie were acquired under Bergevin. That's not the sign of a GM making it "his" team.

Not too mention there mistakes like Bournival (Traded for under Gauthier), and crediting Galchenyuk to Bergevin is also a stretch, we "earned" that pick under Gauthier shouldn't he get credit?

On the flip side guys like Desharnais/Emelin may not have been acquired by Bergevin but they are now Bergevin guys thanks to those 4 year extensions. So yes it's Bergevin's team, not because he originally acquired the players but because he chose them to build around.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

There is a little bit of cherry picking going on here.... picking the best of one and the worst of the other.

- You seem to forget about getting a first round pick (Pacioretty) and Gorges for Rivet? along with many other moves.

It's a good sell move at the deadline that happens all the time. Nothing more. It's not genius by Gainey. Just a good sell at the deadline. I could dig up tons of those. I always found Gorges to be ridiculously overrated on here although serviceable and he was traded for very little. The only reason you're mentioning this trade is because Timmins made magic happen with that pick.

But that same year, we were seller at the deadline despite the fact we nearly squeezed into the playoffs (missed by 2 pts). Gainey actually showed a lack of clear direction here. He kept Souray who was having an all-star season, barely missed the playoffs then let Souray go for nothing. Either you're a seller or you're not. If Rivet had garnered that type of return that year, don't tell me Souray with his 26 goals and 64 pts couldn't have gotten an even better return. Hell, I'd have settled for a 1st round pick. Either keep Rivet and try to make the playoffs (stupid, but not as illogical as just trading Rivet), or sell as much as you can, particularly if you're not going to keep the guy anyway (Souray let go for nothing). But nope, more half and half measures from Gainey and patch up jobs. The MO of his entire tenure here, he had truly mastered the art of icing an average roster.

Truth be told, Gainey should have put the best asset of this organization to better use and fed Timmins picks. Instead he did the opposite. Perhaps we could have drafted another good player a la Pacioretty with less of this :

-Tanguay for 1st
-Jim Dowd for 4th
-Schneider for 2nd
-Moore for a 2nd
-Todd Simpson for a 6th
-Johnson for 4th
-Lang for 2nd
-Kemp for 7th

I'm not gonna say they were all bad moves, or even mostly bad moves. I think we got fair value for the picks... if we had been contenders. It would make a lot more sense for MB to start trading picks now than it did for Gainey to do it back then. We had a mediocre team at best with no star players and no hope of going all the way. Trading picks for players like this was a huge waste considering where we were at.

Not to mention the useless waste of assets

-Losing Beauchemin to waivers
-Losing Souray to FA without trading him at the deadline
-Losing Streit to stupid
-Losing Ribeiro to more stupid
-Losing McDo to even more stupid in order to let Koivu go to replace him by a worse player in Gomez

- Getting Kovalev for basically nothing (Balej and a 2nd who ended up a bust).

I am not a huge fan of Kovalev. He had one great season, one good one. All of the good ones interspersed with bad ones. All the while being really high maintenance and a distraction. And nothing of it remains today. We didn't accomplish anything significant and have no roster assets to show for it.

Which is what I was going for with my "cherry picking".

I was going for what is left long term ? Even though Savard stayed a very short time as habs GM he has had long term impact positive moves, and no long term negative ones.

Also you can't credit all of Timmins picks to Savard. Every year there is an organizational review of all departments and Scouting is assessed and decisions made, at what point do contract renewals become part of the new GM and not the old one?? How many years was Timmins signed for originally?? Did Gainey renew the deal?

Well, Gainey sure didn't recognize the asset he had in Timmins. Otherwise he would have fed him picks, not wasted them on trying to patch up marginal teams for 1st or 2nd round exits, and traded firsts for guys like Tanguay. And then proceeded by throwing away one of Timmins actual real good pick in a crappy deal.

Every GM has good and bad moves, you can't just pick the good of one and the bad of the other and call that the end of the evaluation.

Evaluate all of the moves, and yeah, you might be right that Gainey was worse than Savard, but doing it on this cherry picked basis doesn't prove much.

I was going for long term impact. Legacy. Not a list of good and bad moves.

 

[Rapala]

If they were so elite why did 44 other picks not take Bergeron?

Why did it take 22 picks to get Giroux?

Not quite as easy as you make it out to be.

Thank you man,

I understand that but i wasn't the only one in an uproar when it happened.
People became very critical of our organization's scouting not long after.
We seemed to continually miss out with regards to the next/best one available. (Francophone)
It isn't a coincidence that the organization adressed that publicly not long after stating they would make it a priority to revamp their scouting in the Q...
It also helped to lead us down tbe wrong path with regards to LL.
Many of the people i know some who played against him all said the same thing NHL never too soft...
I guess we thought he would fill out?

just an observation.

 

[JohnLennon]

Not too mention there mistakes like Bournival (Traded for under Gauthier), and crediting Galchenyuk to Bergevin is also a stretch, we "earned" that pick under Gauthier shouldn't he get credit?

So you're basically saying that because the team was absolute garbage under Gauthier that year, he deserves the pick that Bergevin and Timmins made because he got us into that awful position? He should be criticised for running such a poor team, not rewarded.

 

[Rapala]

So you're basically saying that because the team was absolute garbage under Gauthier that year, he deserves the pick that Bergevin and Timmins made because he got us into that awful position? He should be criticised for running such a poor team, not rewarded.

Well sure he does cause the Habs don't/can't afford to tank in this market and he completely ignored that.

 

[Treb]

He's not a Bergevin acquisition.

That is true. My mistake.

Still, most of the player have been signed/traded for/drafted/re-signed by Bergevin which means he likes those players and that makes it his team.

I'm not sure how you can really say it's Bergevin's team using that kind of a list. First going purely from that list only one top-6 forward, one top-4 defenceman, and the 3rd string goalie were acquired under Bergevin. That's not the sign of a GM making it "his" team.

Not too mention there mistakes like Bournival (Traded for under Gauthier), and crediting Galchenyuk to Bergevin is also a stretch, we "earned" that pick under Gauthier shouldn't he get credit?

On the flip side guys like Desharnais/Emelin may not have been acquired by Bergevin but they are now Bergevin guys thanks to those 4 year extensions. So yes it's Bergevin's team, not because he originally acquired the players but because he chose them to build around.

The only mistake is Bournival as far as I can see. Agreed, crediting Chuckie to Bergevin may be a stretch, but he still chose him ahead of Rielly, Grigorenko, Dumba (lol Normand Flynn) etc... Gauthier didn't make the selection though, who knows if he would've picked him (probably, but you can never be sure).

Both our last sentence are in agreement though.

 

[kingdok]

Let's see

Patches (Gainey/Timmins)
DD (Carbonneau/ Gainey)
PAP (Bergevin)
Chuckie (Bergevin/Timmins)
Plek (Savard)
Gallagher (Gainey, but mostly Timmins)
Bourque (Gauthier)
Eller (Gauthier)
Sekac (Bergevin)
Bournival (Bergevin)
Prust (Bergevin)
Malhotra (Bergevin)
Weise (Bergevin)
Moen (Gainey)

Subban (Gainey/Timmins)
Markov (Houle)
Emelin (Gainey)
Gilbert (Bergevin)
Tinordi (Gauthier/Timmins)
Weaver (Bergevin)
Beaulieu (Gauthier/Timmins)

Price ( Gainey/Timmins)
Tokarski (Bergevin)
Budaj (Gauthier)

So
Bergevin: 10
Timmins: 7
Gainey: 7
Gauthier: 5
Carbonneau: 1
Savard: 1
Houle:1

Pretty sure it is Bergevin's team now, mostly. Especially since most of the guys brought in by other GM were re-signed by him.

Add to that the moves that Bergevin (or previous GMs in some cases) didn't make. I mean not letting players go when they hit UFA or not trading players. Having Markov on the team now is just as much Bergevin's credit then Houle, Savard, Gainey or Gauthier. Emelin was dafted under Gainey's, but the long wait of seeing him come over finally came to fruition under Bergevin's. He also has to be credited for that.

 

[Treb]

Add to that the moves that Bergevin (or previous GMs in some cases) didn't make. I mean not letting players go when they hit UFA or not trading players. Having Markov on the team now is just as much Bergevin's credit then Houle, Savard, Gainey or Gauthier. Emelin was dafted under Gainey's, but the long wait of seeing him come over finally came to fruition under Bergevin's. He also has to be credited with that.

Hence my last sentence.

Pretty sure it is Bergevin's team now, mostly. Especially since most of the guys brought in by other GM were re-signed by him.

I believe that we can all agree that Bergevin chose the majority of the players on his roster by either signing or re-signing them (or trading, drafting...) except Bourque and Plekanec who were already signed to long-term contracts.

He shedded the dead wood (Gionta, Kaberle, Gomez etc.) and is now slowly building the team he wants.

EDIT: Last year was way more Gauthier/Gainey than this year.

 

[habfaninvictoria]

Timmins is consistently ranked the number one scout or among the top few in the NHL, that is in fact enough to ask for.

And FYI, he bats .500 in the top-60.

From 2003, Andrei Kostitsyn and Maxim Lapierre got a legitimate NHL career, Cory Uruqhart did not.
From 2004, Kyle Chipchura got a legitimate NHL career, nobody was drafted in the 2nd round.
From 2005, Carey Price and Guillaume Latendresse had legitimate NHL careers.
From 2006, David Fischer, Ben Maxwell, and Mathieu Carle did not have NHL careers.
From 2007, Ryan McDonagh, Max Pcioretty, and PK Subban have had and continue to have legitimate NHL careers.
From 2008, no 1st rounder, Danny Kristo was traded.
From 2009, Leblanc busted, no 2nd rounder.
From 2010 onwards, too early to tell.

So for what we can evaluate, Timmins did 8/14 in the 1st and rounds in the period 2003-2009, including 4/14 who became elite players.

OK I'm not going to dump on Timmins cause I like him but.... how the **** do you get 8/14 here. If you were drafted in the first round or later you should still be in the NHL. In that regard he is 5/11 which is well below what you should be getting out of the first round and I'm including Beaulieu as an NHLER. Galchenyuk and Price were top 5 can't miss picks...McDo was a great pick but gone and Chipchura is a career 4th liner do we really want to count them as a win.

Timmins is great in the later rounds and finds gems from non traditional sources. I don't know who make the scouting decision in Canada but it seems they may not be up to par. The teams from a few years ago had a disproportional amount of Europeans and Americans compared with most NHL teams. We take more chances on Europeans and USHS than other teams. Sometimes is it works sometimes it doesn't.

Who built this team. Well if you consider our core as the major factor then it's Gainey. If you consider the changes made in getting rid of bad choices and bringing in solid depth players then MB. Look at this years training camp. All of the youth pressing for spots are mostly MB moves. I can't remember a camp where I like what I see from so many players. That to me is a cultural shift that MB is responsible for.

 

[Sorinth]

So you're basically saying that because the team was absolute garbage under Gauthier that year, he deserves the pick that Bergevin and Timmins made because he got us into that awful position? He should be criticised for running such a poor team, not rewarded.

And with virtually the same team they finished the 1st in the vision the following year, and went to the ECF the year after. Gauthier took a big gamble on Markov being healthy and got screwed over when he wasn't. Blame him for that all you want but the idea that Gauthier assembled a "poor" team and Bergevin came in and turned it into a good one by signing Prust, Armstrong, Bouillon and trading Cole for Ryder is laughable.

We aren't the ones rewarding Gauthier for a last place finish, the league did that. But to then turn around and credit Bergevin with that is nonsense. Like every other pick we make the credit goes to Timmins, the GM doesn't do much.

TThe only mistake is Bournival as far as I can see. Agreed, crediting Chuckie to Bergevin may be a stretch, but he still chose him ahead of Rielly, Grigorenko, Dumba (lol Normand Flynn) etc... Gauthier didn't make the selection though, who knows if he would've picked him (probably, but you can never be sure).

Timmins made the selection, just like he drafted almost every other player that we drafted and you listed.

In the end the pick was acquired under Gauthier, so I would credit him much more then I would Bergevin. Same goes for De La Rose and Fucale, Gauthier acquired those picks and Timmins drafted them under Bergevin's regime.

But in the end it's pointless to say this player is because of that GM. A guy like Markov for instance was re-signed as a UFA by Gainey, Gauthier, and Bergevin. Giving all the credit to Houle seems naive. For Gainey it was a no brainer to re-sign him, Gauthier and Bergevin on the other hand actually had to make a decision on whether to re-sign him or not.

Bergevin has had the opportunity to build the team he wants. This is it. So it's his team regardless of who acquired who.

 

[Ezpz]

OK I'm not going to dump on Timmins cause I like him but.... how the **** do you get 8/14 here. If you were drafted in the first round or later you should still be in the NHL. In that regard he is 5/11 which is well below what you should be getting out of the first round and I'm including Beaulieu as an NHLER. Galchenyuk and Price were top 5 can't miss picks...McDo was a great pick but gone and Chipchura is a career 4th liner do we really want to count them as a win.

Timmins is great in the later rounds and finds gems from non traditional sources. I don't know who make the scouting decision in Canada but it seems they may not be up to par. The teams from a few years ago had a disproportional amount of Europeans and Americans compared with most NHL teams. We take more chances on Europeans and USHS than other teams. Sometimes is it works sometimes it doesn't.

Who built this team. Well if you consider our core as the major factor then it's Gainey. If you consider the changes made in getting rid of bad choices and bringing in solid depth players then MB. Look at this years training camp. All of the youth pressing for spots are mostly MB moves. I can't remember a camp where I like what I see from so many players. That to me is a cultural shift that MB is responsible for.

I think you vastly overestimate how many players actually play in the league for longer than 6 seasons.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

OK I'm not going to dump on Timmins cause I like him but.... how the **** do you get 8/14 here. If you were drafted in the first round or later you should still be in the NHL. In that regard he is 5/11 which is well below what you should be getting out of the first round and I'm including Beaulieu as an NHLER. Galchenyuk and Price were top 5 can't miss picks...McDo was a great pick but gone and Chipchura is a career 4th liner do we really want to count them as a win.

Timmins is great in the later rounds and finds gems from non traditional sources. I don't know who make the scouting decision in Canada but it seems they may not be up to par. The teams from a few years ago had a disproportional amount of Europeans and Americans compared with most NHL teams. We take more chances on Europeans and USHS than other teams. Sometimes is it works sometimes it doesn't.

Who built this team. Well if you consider our core as the major factor then it's Gainey. If you consider the changes made in getting rid of bad choices and bringing in solid depth players then MB. Look at this years training camp. All of the youth pressing for spots are mostly MB moves. I can't remember a camp where I like what I see from so many players. That to me is a cultural shift that MB is responsible for.

I don't see how ? Because he wasn't incompetent enough to fire Timmins ?