Since Trevor Timmins
View Single Post
07-11-2012, 01:58 PM
Join Date: Sep 2006
Originally Posted by
Well that's one way, certainly, but I think it's ignoring our biggest weakness, which is trading and pro scouting. Let's say you have three primary means of acquiring players - drafting them, signing them, and trading for them. Timmins' one weakness to date has been the inability to draft a bonafide superstar, and we agree that for whatever reason, Montreal has trouble signing them. What about trading? Of course, trading for a superstar is no easy task - there's not a lot of them ever available at any given time, and they cost a lot. But they're out there. They've been traded in the past and there's some on the block right now. If we have a scout that can stockpile NHL-capable talents the way Timmins can, why can't we use a package of those assets to land a star, instead of trading them away for scraps in little individual trades? Who knows what a package of something like McDonagh, Latendresse and Grabovski would have ever gotten us, but I'm willing to bet it was more than what we currently have to show for their departures. That's a 2nd line centre, a 2nd/3rd line winger, and a #2 defenseman - surely we deserve better than Gomez, Pouliot and Pateryn in return.
Of course, that's revisionist history - what's done is done. But if the argument is that Timmins can draft NHLers but no stars, why not use those assets to go after the star you can't get via the draft? It's a simple matter of assessing your strengths and weaknesses and compensating in one area where you're strong in another.
This is where there's a disconnect - we have a scout who can draft solid NHLers like it's nobody's business, yet we have nothing to show for it. The scouting results are solid, it's the trading that's a disaster. How many actual NHL trades have the Habs won in the last 5 or even 10 years? Most of the trades we have won are the ones where we get draft picks. You can probably count on one hand the number of times we've made a trade for an NHL player and actually won the trade.
You seemed to have missed the point for roughly the 400th time in this thread. What I'm saying is that drafted players are only a part of the equation (unless you think Timmins should have a 100% success rate and our entire roster should be filled with his successes, which is the impression I'm getting). The rest of the blanks have to be filled in through trades and free agency, which is the part that falls on the shoulders of the GM and the pro scouts. Is Boston as good as a team if they don't sign Chara in free agency? Do the Canucks make the finals without trading for Luongo?
If you see that your scout is deficient in a certain area, obviously you have to make up for it with your other means - signings and trades. That's what I mean when I say that there's no way Timmins is entirely at fault for the Habs continuing to be a "middling team".
No i think I get it quite clearly.
I'd rather draft the top end talent and sign or trade for the easier, cheaper to attain 2nd to 4th line players. You'd apparently would rather build a team by drafting 2nd to 4th liners and then try to sign or trade for the harder to get and more expensive top end talent. If that makes sense to you, then so be it.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by shutehinside