HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Trevor Timmins Part III

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-13-2017, 09:51 PM
  #76
Mathletic
Registered User
 
Mathletic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St-Augustin, Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viggo Mortensen View Post
Anybody still has the RDS zoom on the 2009 Habs draft list?

Mathletic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2017, 10:02 PM
  #77
Adam Michaels
Registered User
 
Adam Michaels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfan92 View Post
Too bad we don't have any depth at any position.
Isn't that a drafting issue?
Their goaltending and defense has depth.

Lindgren-Fucale-McNiven-Hawkey

Sergachev-Juulsen-Bourque-Lernout-Mete

Our forwards (particularly the center) needs some more stock-piling.

Scherbak-Hudon-DLR-Audette-Carr-Gregoire-Addison-Bitten-Bradley-Pezzetta-Evans

Not exactly a forward depth to write home about. Some of them can become impact players somewhere down the road. Some Bottom-6. Some might become career AHL'ers while others won't go too far. It is, however, the position they need to continue stocking up on. And as mentioned, particularly the center position.

Adam Michaels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2017, 10:16 PM
  #78
Hugo Sham
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Montreal
Posts: 12,800
vCash: 500
he needs to find a ****ing center with our 3 picks in the first two rounds

Hugo Sham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2017, 10:17 PM
  #79
The Great Pateryn
Protect Da Deficit
 
The Great Pateryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 7,925
vCash: 457
I don't like him, but I am afraid of who Bergevin would have instead.

The Great Pateryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2017, 10:51 PM
  #80
ProspectsFanatic
Artturi Lehkonen
 
ProspectsFanatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,312
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son Oncle Jerry View Post
Charles McAvoy: 24:11 TOI in Game 1 yesterday for Boston. Where's Sergachev at? Oh right. He struggled against juniors and his team got upset in the OHL playoffs.

But it's not on Timmins. As usual...
I don't think any team would have drafted McAvoy at 9... Sergachev still look like a great pick to me. There are better areas where you could criticize Timmins.

ProspectsFanatic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2017, 11:58 PM
  #81
habsfan92
Registered User
 
habsfan92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Michaels View Post
Their goaltending and defense has depth.

Lindgren-Fucale-McNiven-Hawkey

Sergachev-Juulsen-Bourque-Lernout-Mete

Our forwards (particularly the center) needs some more stock-piling.

Scherbak-Hudon-DLR-Audette-Carr-Gregoire-Addison-Bitten-Bradley-Pezzetta-Evans

Not exactly a forward depth to write home about. Some of them can become impact players somewhere down the road. Some Bottom-6. Some might become career AHL'ers while others won't go too far. It is, however, the position they need to continue stocking up on. And as mentioned, particularly the center position.
So, listing 2 goalies that weren't drafted doesn't support depth through drafting.
The past two first round picks were dmen, so they can be included for now. Three of those listed have upsides of 5-6-7 dmen, if they make it.
Of the forwards listed, only one has top 6 potential, and that is hopeful.
I guess listing draft picks is what passes for depth.
For me, having depth is having drafted players in your system that are pushing your nhl players and challenging them for a job. That, we do not have. Hence why it is said we do not have the assets & depth to trade for a top 6. Honestly though, that list is not very inspiring.

habsfan92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2017, 05:19 AM
  #82
Adam Michaels
Registered User
 
Adam Michaels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,882
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfan92 View Post
So, listing 2 goalies that weren't drafted doesn't support depth through drafting.
The past two first round picks were dmen, so they can be included for now. Three of those listed have upsides of 5-6-7 dmen, if they make it.
Of the forwards listed, only one has top 6 potential, and that is hopeful.
I guess listing draft picks is what passes for depth.
For me, having depth is having drafted players in your system that are pushing your nhl players and challenging them for a job. That, we do not have. Hence why it is said we do not have the assets & depth to trade for a top 6. Honestly though, that list is not very inspiring.
This is the thread for Timmins the head of Amateur Scouting. Even if a player is not drafted but signed like Lindgren and McNiven, it is still Timmins and his team that scouted them.

What their upside is, you can't place limits on their growth already. A lot of players in later rounds have become good to great players in the league.

We don't have many challenging for an NHL spot because most of our depth has either not started their pro careers yet, are either in their 1st or 2nd pro year, and are all anywhere between 18-22 years old. Are you expecting them all to start flying out of the gate?

Adam Michaels is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2017, 05:59 AM
  #83
Whitesnake
Here we go again!
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 64,485
vCash: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by ProspectsFanatic View Post
I don't think any team would have drafted McAvoy at 9... Sergachev still look like a great pick to me. There are better areas where you could criticize Timmins.
Not sure how it's relevant. Most people thought that Price would never have gone at #5. Nobody thought Thomas Hickey would go #4. So it worked out for Price, didn't work out for Hickey. So MacAvoy could have clearly gone #9. And for a guy who specializes in American born hockey player, NOBODY would have been surprised to see MacAvoy being taken. Chances are with Sergachev and Jost available, the draft thread would ahve been incredibly mad about the pick until.....today. You would then, today, be able to read a "Time to eat crow you Timmins doubters" thread. And that would have been fine as in the end, it means a better hockey team.

Does 1 game make a career? Does that mean that Sergachev will be a bust. Absolutely not. But again....they better be right this time around....'cause it will be a continuation of bad picks in the 1st round for the best head scout in the league.....or so some say....But we are not there yet. Sergachev has plenaty of potential. Are people going to say that MacAvoy should have been picked 3rd because Dubois is also "struggling"? Surely not. So let's wait a little but.....he better be right.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2017, 07:39 AM
  #84
calder candidate
Registered User
 
calder candidate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathletic View Post
So where is Louis Leblanc name on that list?

calder candidate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2017, 08:14 AM
  #85
Whitesnake
Here we go again!
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 64,485
vCash: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by calder candidate View Post
So where is Louis Leblanc name on that list?
There was a better screen shot than this where you saw Leblanc at No. 9 I think.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2017, 10:26 AM
  #86
SpeedyPotato
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 692
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Not sure how it's relevant. Most people thought that Price would never have gone at #5. Nobody thought Thomas Hickey would go #4. So it worked out for Price, didn't work out for Hickey. So MacAvoy could have clearly gone #9. And for a guy who specializes in American born hockey player, NOBODY would have been surprised to see MacAvoy being taken. Chances are with Sergachev and Jost available, the draft thread would ahve been incredibly mad about the pick until.....today. You would then, today, be able to read a "Time to eat crow you Timmins doubters" thread. And that would have been fine as in the end, it means a better hockey team.

Does 1 game make a career? Does that mean that Sergachev will be a bust. Absolutely not. But again....they better be right this time around....'cause it will be a continuation of bad picks in the 1st round for the best head scout in the league.....or so some say....But we are not there yet. Sergachev has plenaty of potential. Are people going to say that MacAvoy should have been picked 3rd because Dubois is also "struggling"? Surely not. So let's wait a little but.....he better be right.
I agree with you, I'd just hope for once we'd be the team drafting a guy who's magically ready to come and help the team after a year like that... You see it happen here and there in the league. I really hope Sergachev could be our Werenski next year, but he didn't seem ready at all.. Who knows, a whole summer can make a huge difference!

SpeedyPotato is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2017, 08:06 PM
  #87
JuJu Mobb
Registered User
 
JuJu Mobb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 680
vCash: 500
This guy as been head scout for damn near 15 years... What elite forward he drafted besides Pacioretty???

JuJu Mobb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2017, 08:23 PM
  #88
blarneylad
Registered User
 
blarneylad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,158
vCash: 584
Most elite forwards or players are drafted top 10 in draft.

He drafted Kostitsyn 10th, Price 5th and Galchenyuk 3rd. Plus Sergachev 9th. Most of his other picks were mid-to-late 1st rounders. And Gainey/Gauthier and now Bergevin have traded many of the 2nd round picks over the years. Heck they missed a 1st the year they traded it for Tanguay.

He really hasn't been that bad of a scout. Most teams are built via three categories.

1) Draft
2) Trade
3) UFA

Habs have been non-existent on the UFA front.

blarneylad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2017, 12:04 AM
  #89
habsfan92
Registered User
 
habsfan92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Michaels View Post
This is the thread for Timmins the head of Amateur Scouting. Even if a player is not drafted but signed like Lindgren and McNiven, it is still Timmins and his team that scouted them.

What their upside is, you can't place limits on their growth already. A lot of players in later rounds have become good to great players in the league.

We don't have many challenging for an NHL spot because most of our depth has either not started their pro careers yet, are either in their 1st or 2nd pro year, and are all anywhere between 18-22 years old. Are you expecting them all to start flying out of the gate?
This only a valid argument if TT has been drafting for 2-3 years. Sorry, since he has been with the team 10+, this is kind of a failure.
And because of this lack of depth (lets say quality depth to be specific) it is more difficult for MB to use that quality depth to acquire a top six the team needs.

habsfan92 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2017, 12:23 AM
  #90
groovejuice
Registered User
 
groovejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 9,574
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfan92 View Post
This only a valid argument if TT has been drafting for 2-3 years. Sorry, since he has been with the team 10+, this is kind of a failure.
And because of this lack of depth (lets say quality depth to be specific) it is more difficult for MB to use that quality depth to acquire a top six the team needs.
We'll see if Sly gets replaced to start next season. If so, we may have a better idea of our prospects upside by mid-season.

groovejuice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2017, 06:01 AM
  #91
montreal
Moderator
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 30,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuJu Mobb View Post
This guy as been head scout for damn near 15 years... What elite forward he drafted besides Pacioretty???
I wouldn't look at it that way, drafting for position is a terrible idea imo. If in '05 he takes Kopitar over Price then the Habs would be in a very different place. So he would have drafted a top center but this team wouldn't be much without an elite goalie.

There's 2 things that always stick out to me that others just don't want to look at.

1) Pre Lefebvre the Habs had much better success at development. Under Lefebvre it's been a nightmare. Moving your top prospect at the time to a much tougher position mid-season after said player has been out most of the year just seems like a terrible way to develop a top prospect. Putting him as the 2nd youngest player on the team on the 3rd line the following season with the youngest player on the team for much of the season just seems like a terrible way to develop one of your top prospects.

Granted management is right there to blame as well. Imo re-hiring Lefebvre is just inexcusable. I would have preferred a cardboard cutout of Don Cherry behind the bench then Lefebvre. But management consistently calling up 19/20 year olds too soon is something they just don't seem to be learning from. Beaulieu, Leblanc, Tinordi, McCarron, DLR. Then add to it the sending them back and forth doesn't seem to help matters either.

In no way am I saying Timmins and his staff aren't to blame. I have said this over and over and over and over, there's a lot of blame to go around. If I were making a list, Timmins would be much lower on the things we need to fix list. But that doesn't mean he and Churla along with the rest haven't made their fair share of mistakes and then some. To me if you are going to get rid of Timmins, you better fix your develop first or what's the damn point.

2) After the 2015 draft, the Habs had 1 top 10 pick since '05. They had 4 top 20 picks since Price. McDonagh, Leblanc, Beaulieu and Galchenyuk. That's not to say that they are off the hook for their mistakes, but to me when you pick less and lower you have to expect it to impact you. Imo if they had done a better job developing prospects, Timmins and his staff are going to look better as they have shown in the past to be able to draft talent and imo that's not something that he is just going to forget.


As for goalscorers,

Pacioretty is one of the best in the NHL. Galchenyuk has hit 30, Gallagher, Lats, both Kostitsyn's, Grabo, D'Agostini, all hit 20 + goals. Lehkonen should easily hit 20+ going forward.

montreal is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2017, 06:56 AM
  #92
Whitesnake
Here we go again!
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 64,485
vCash: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
2) After the 2015 draft, the Habs had 1 top 10 pick since '05. They had 4 top 20 picks since Price. McDonagh, Leblanc, Beaulieu and Galchenyuk. That's not to say that they are off the hook for their mistakes, but to me when you pick less and lower you have to expect it to impact you. Imo if they had done a better job developing prospects, Timmins and his staff are going to look better as they have shown in the past to be able to draft talent and imo that's not something that he is just going to forget.
I obviously understand all this. But that type of analysis, I'd reserve it for most of the other head scout. The day that we keep saying how he's the best or even top 5, what separates him from the rest if he is analyzed the same way all the others are?

And again, the part about the development cannot be wrong. But nobody can say that it IS the problem. You have to pair it both together. Gallagher was a great pick. He didn't need Sly development but for the small time that he was there, Sly didn't have time to destroy him. So we know that he was a great pick. That developed in the NHL. Same with Lehkonen that developed elsewhere. At one point though, we loved Daniel Carr here. And he was developed down there. Now...seems that he can,t bring his game to another level. Sly's fault? Or just him or has stopped progressing? As it ALWAYS happen as far as prospects are concerned. People think that the learning curve of everybody should be the same. And it's not. People stops progressing. And it might not even be Timmins fault or Sly's fault. But since we don't know better, it will be. And it has to be. Everything might not be the coach fault, or the GM fault or the players fault and yet everyday, a coach or a GM are fired. And players are traded. Name of the game. At one point, someboyd will have to lose their job over this.

And incredibly enough, rumor is that Sly will keep his in Laval. Just for that Bergevin shows he's unfit for the job he's having. Insane if he comes back. Though André Tourigny's name is mentioned to. So we'll see. Maybe we need to NOT make the playoffs for him to NOT come back. It will only take 6 years of not making it for Bergevin to understand.....

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2017, 07:42 AM
  #93
Habs100
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuJu Mobb View Post
This guy as been head scout for damn near 15 years... What elite forward he drafted besides Pacioretty???

Timmins hasn't drafted a lot of offensive players with offensive talent. But his goalie and dmen drafting has been off the charts elite.


McDonagh Subban
Sergachev Streit (4 number 1 dmen)
Beaulieu Emelin
Yannick Weber
Juulsen, Mete


Price
Halak
Lindgren, McNiven


It's too bad management couldn't turn elite/high end dmen into elite/high end forwards when it had opportunities: McDonagh for Gomez, Halak for Eller (should have held out for a package for Oshie) for Shaw.

Habs100 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2017, 07:52 AM
  #94
montreal
Moderator
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 30,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
I obviously understand all this. But that type of analysis, I'd reserve it for most of the other head scout. The day that we keep saying how he's the best or even top 5, what separates him from the rest if he is analyzed the same way all the others are?
i do think Timmins is one of the best, although to be honest I don't pay enough attention to the rest of the league to say. I know what it was like pre-Timmins and I shudder at the thought of going back to that. So if we look past where Timmins ranks in the NHL among his peers, and just look at the body of work vs what he's had to work with via lack of top 10/20/50 picks and you add in the problems we have had at the development level then to me he has done a good job. Of course he's made mistakes but he's also hit a few out of the park.

montreal is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2017, 09:12 AM
  #95
JGRB
#EllerThugLife
 
JGRB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,181
vCash: 500
When are we going to finally strike gold with a late first like the Bruins did with Pastrnak? The only one that's amounted to anything in 15 years is Pacioretty. 15 years!!!

It's time for a change of direction with the scouting staff, IMO.

JGRB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2017, 09:14 AM
  #96
Hannibal
Fear the Weber
 
Hannibal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,699
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGRB View Post
When are we going to finally strike gold with a late first like the Bruins did with Pastrnak? The only one that's amounted to anything in 15 years is Pacioretty. 15 years!!!

It's time for a change of direction with the scouting staff, IMO.
Yup. We suck at drafting.

Hannibal is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2017, 09:40 AM
  #97
jfm133
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,164
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
I know what it was like pre-Timmins and I shudder at the thought of going back to that.

It's a bit an urban legend to say it was atrocious before Timmins. The problem is that Gainey gave away good players picked during that period and failed to manage Perezhogin properly.

1998-2002

Ribiero
Beauchemin
Markov
Ryder
Hainsey
Komisarek
Perezhogin
Plekanec
Higgins


So 9 players in 5 years including a great #1 D and two top-6 C.

jfm133 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2017, 09:45 AM
  #98
Whitesnake
Here we go again!
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 64,485
vCash: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
i do think Timmins is one of the best, although to be honest I don't pay enough attention to the rest of the league to say. I know what it was like pre-Timmins and I shudder at the thought of going back to that. So if we look past where Timmins ranks in the NHL among his peers, and just look at the body of work vs what he's had to work with via lack of top 10/20/50 picks and you add in the problems we have had at the development level then to me he has done a good job. Of course he's made mistakes but he's also hit a few out of the park.
Well....what people do to praise Timmins is to look at his overall body of work. 'Cause you can't start from 2008, it's dishonest. So what about we pretend that we had the same head scout....and that we should do like we're doing with Timmins and take a whole let's say 9 years evaluation, ' cause it might be too soon to evaluate 2013 and up? So before Timmins, from 1994 to 2002 you had picks like Theodore, Vokoun, Robidas, Ribeiro, Beauchemin, Markov, Ryder, Hainsey, Komisarek, Plekanec and Higgins. So as incredibly bad those years were....you had some pretty good players too in there. And they were awful years. Then 9 years before, from 85 to 93 you had Gilchrist, Brunet, Lumme, Odelein, Schneider, Desjardins, Leclair, Cassels, Popovic, Brisebois, Savage, Petrov, Bure, Rivet, Tucker, Koivu....that's awesome. Some will say, well they had a gazillion picks....true. Yet, they didn't have the techniques and the knowledge that the guys right now have.

So to say that thank god of Timmins because of what we had before is not exactly great for Timmins. 'Cause we were probably the worst of them all or clsoe to it. And yet, as bad as they were....we have a few very good players in there 9 years before Timmins.

I don't think that the past should indicate that we can move forward. But I'd go in all aspects of it from drafting to development.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2017, 09:53 AM
  #99
Frank Drebin
Registered User
 
Frank Drebin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,329
vCash: 50
Removing 2007 which was a fantastic year by all accounts, I think we'd be one of the worst drafting teams in the league.

Frank Drebin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-16-2017, 10:00 AM
  #100
MrNasty
Registered User
 
MrNasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,806
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGRB View Post
When are we going to finally strike gold with a late first like the Bruins did with Pastrnak? The only one that's amounted to anything in 15 years is Pacioretty. 15 years!!!

It's time for a change of direction with the scouting staff, IMO.
You answered your own question. Pacioretty is top forward drafted late in the first. I think if a team drafts a top line forward late in the first round every 10-15 years then they are doing well.

MrNasty is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:34 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2017 All Rights Reserved.