Player Discussion Phillip Danault II: 2nd C? edition

[Mrb1p]

Kinda like Crosby. Man, no skill whatsoever there.

The length people will go...

 

[ECWHSWI]

Kinda like Crosby. Man, no skill whatsoever there.

The length people will go...

you mean, like make comparisons with Crosby or something...

 

[Andrei79]

Kinda like Crosby. Man, no skill whatsoever there.

The length people will go...

He's got skill, just not enough of it. I'd rather have him on the third or on the wing like last year.

 

[Mrb1p]

He's got skill, just not enough of it. I'd rather have him on the third or on the wing like last year.

At what point do we stop relying on a preconceived idea of the player and actually take his production seriously?

He comes in right behind Pacioretty at ES over the last two years, and in those two years he spent a majority of this time on the fourth line. So we have a player, a center, producing at first line rates at even strength.

Obviously, the truth probably is in between these two extremes. Hes obviously not a first liner but hes also pretty far from being a 3rd liner. Especially when you consider that most 3rd line C have around half his ES production over the same timeframe.

I draw a parallel to Couturier. Hes a player that had high ES production a la Danault, but was relayed on the 2nd wave behind a great PP in Philly, maybe Danault doesnt have it in him to put up the 10-20 points on the PP a year to boost himself up from a 40 points producer to a 50-60 one, but maybe, like Couturier in Philly, he just hasnt had the oppotunity.

Regardless, splitting even strength and PP production makes sense, special teams are a whole other game and you can survive with players like Metropolit and Letestu there.

 

[Habs Halifax]

I think we can use Danault as a 2nd line center today but ideally he is our 3rd center in the near future (hopefully). I have DLR as the 4th center and Poehling as the 2nd center. Evans is a dark horse and who knows about Drouin and Galchenyuk in the future

Very curious to see what Danault’s next contact is

 

[Habs100]

(MOD)

Danault is a pretty talented player, he just isn't elite or exciting.

He's a lot like a young Plekanec to me.

Plekanec had more offensive flair in his prime. Danault gets his points more from his speed and getting to the right spots quickly. Plekanec used to get his points by his shiftiness and vision.

 

[Habs100]

Since Drouin is Radulov's replacement, I wonder how he might do with Danault and Pacioretty.

Then, take the kid gloves off of Chucky and give a shot to lead his own line:

Pacioretty Danault Drouin
Hudon/Byron Galchenyuk Gallagher
Hudon/Byron Plekanec Shaw
Carr De la Rose/Froese Deslaurier

 

[No More Subban]

Since Drouin is Radulov's replacement, I wonder how he might do with Danault and Pacioretty.

Then, take the kid gloves off of Chucky and give a shot to lead his own line:

Pacioretty Danault Drouin
Hudon/Byron Galchenyuk Gallagher
Hudon/Byron Plekanec Shaw
Carr De la Rose/Froese Deslaurier

Nah.. Patches, Drouin on the same line do not work. Won't experiment with that anymore. Max can't keep up.

As for Danault, I do like the guy..but he should be a bottom 6 player. Same for Byron and Shaw.

 

[Habs100]

Nah.. Patches, Drouin on the same line do not work. Won't experiment with that anymore. Max can't keep up.

As for Danault, I do like the guy..but he should be a bottom 6 player. Same for Byron and Shaw.

That was with Drouin as a center. How would a Paioretty and Radulov comb have done if Radulov were centering the line, i.e. playing out of position?

 

[Catanddogguitarrr]

That was with Drouin as a center. How would a Paioretty and Radulov comb have done if Radulov were centering the line, i.e. playing out of position?

I think anyone with Paccio and Radu would be fine. Radu was going deep, beating D, keeping the puck until he finds Paccio at the right spot to shoot. Danault could have been complementary to the two others. Drouin could move the puck pretty well in transition spaces and fill the puck to Radu who might fill it to Paccio to shoot. Whatever, makes me think we miss Radu so much, this thread was about Danault. He's a nice guy and still young. Nowhere he's top center material, 2nd or 3rd he's ok.

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

He's on on pace for 15 goals and 49 pts
Thats good 2nd line production

I think the reason people have a hard time accepting him as a 2nd line center is because there isnt a lot of wow in his game. If we showed those people clips of Eller and clips of Danault without knowing who the players were, they would probably think that Eller is the better offensive player simply because of the wow plays he can make.
But in reality, its Danault.

His skating is elite and explosive. He has high hockey iq. His passing level is good, his shot is decent and accurate. Hes good at deflecting puck, and hes good along the boards. Except for his skating, he doesnt really have something that stands up much. However, he isn't bad at anything. Hes at least average at everything.
A guy like Pacioretty is a tremendous goalscorer, but he sucks at passing the puck.
Galchenyuk is very talented, but his board battles and sometime his decision making leaves to be desire.
Danault doesn't have have a weakness like that.

Not to mention, Danault is really good defensively.

 

[schnapshot]

He's on on pace for 15 goals and 49 pts
Thats good 2nd line production

I think the reason people have a hard time accepting him as a 2nd line center is because there isnt a lot of wow in his game. If we showed those people clips of Eller and clips of Danault without knowing who the players were, they would probably think that Eller is the better offensive player simply because of the wow plays he can make.
But in reality, its Danault.

His skating is elite and explosive. He has high hockey iq. His passing level is good, his shot is decent and accurate. Hes good at deflecting puck, and hes good along the boards. Except for his skating, he doesnt really have something that stands up much. However, he isn't bad at anything. Hes at least average at everything.
A guy like Pacioretty is a tremendous goalscorer, but he sucks at passing the puck.
Galchenyuk is very talented, but his board battles and sometime his decision making leaves to be desire.
Danault doesn't have have a weakness like that.

Not to mention, Danault is really good defensively.

He's just one of those players that quietly do a lot. A very very good 3rd center and an alright 2nd center.

 

[SquiddFX]

I don't see the Plekanec-Danault comparisons. Plekanec was a much better player, better shot, better IQ, better defensively. Danault's a poor 2nd line center, Plekanec would've been a very good one.

I agree completely. Plek playing with our best players was a 70pt player. Danault was a 40pt player.

 

[jfm133]

Now the point leader on the team, but he is not a 2C....

 

[Adam Michaels]

I agree completely. Plek playing with our best players was a 70pt player. Danault was a 40pt player.

To be fair, Plekanec reached those heights a few years into his career. Danault was a 40 point player in his second season. It was his first full season and started it as a 4th line winger. He wasn't put in the 1C spot until late December/January, IIRC.

Now that he's put in a Top-6 center role from the start, he's on pace for 50 points, which is similar to Plekanec's progression at his age and stage in his career.

So the most important thing about Danault is that he's trending in the right way, despite the team struggling.

 

[jfm133]

Well said. This guy is still improving.

 

[CrAzYNiNe]

He's on on pace for 15 goals and 49 pts
Thats good 2nd line production

Man do Habs fans have such low expectations. 49 points for a 2nd line center is good? That is borderline mediocre. You center should outproduce your wingers, a 2nd line center should be closer to 60 points.

Unless the Habs have Crosby scoring 100 points a season, you need much better balance from your top centers.

 

[CristianoRonaldo]

You can't go far with guys like Byron, Shaw and Danault playing in the top-6... Nor with Pacio/Drouin/Galchy playing like they are right now.


But good for him, he's our point leader.

 

[76]

Happy to see him progressing from his first full season at center. Again, what a steal for the Habs.

 

[optimus2861]

Man do Habs fans have such low expectations. 49 points for a 2nd line center is good? That is borderline mediocre. You center should outproduce your wingers, a 2nd line center should be closer to 60 points.

Unless the Habs have Crosby scoring 100 points a season, you need much better balance from your top centers.

Well, last season the #31-rated C for points was Toronto's Tyler Bozak at 55. At #60 was Mathieu Perreault with 45. So.. 49 actually does qualify as an average #2C in this day and age. It ain't the 80s or early 90s any more.

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

Man do Habs fans have such low expectations. 49 points for a 2nd line center is good? That is borderline mediocre. You center should outproduce your wingers, a 2nd line center should be closer to 60 points.

Unless the Habs have Crosby scoring 100 points a season, you need much better balance from your top centers.

Are you serious?
You realize only 14 centers had 60 pts or more last year

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

The fact he's producing like this is really the story. Because his all around game is more impressive than the production- though when you combine the 2 things, you definitely have yourself an excellent middle 6 center (which means #2).

 

[CrAzYNiNe]

Are you serious?
You realize only 14 centers had 60 pts or more last year

Well, last season the #31-rated C for points was Toronto's Tyler Bozak at 55. At #60 was Mathieu Perreault with 45. So.. 49 actually does qualify as an average #2C in this day and age. It ain't the 80s or early 90s any more.

You realize that the position a players plays on NHL.com is not actually indicative of where he lines up on the ice? (Drouin is now a C under last years stats. He didn't play center for TB)

You realize the NHL doesn't have 62 top 6 centers? You can take the lazy way out, you can look at the stats in that manner and draw your own conclusions. If I take your way of thinking, that means Connor McDavid at 100 points is a 1st line center and so is Bozak? This doesn't make any sense, does it make sense to you?

Like I said, the Habs don't have a #1 center. That means that your #2 center and #3 center need to step up and produce more. Having a 70 pts #1 and a 60pts #2 is something any team can live with. Have a 60 pt #1 and a 50 pt #2 is a recipe for failure. The Habs don't even have any center that is capable of producing 50 pts... at least not as an NHL center.

The way I calculate is I take ppg for players that have played at least half a season. I take the top 180 players. I average out the top 90 and the next 90. With the average I have a good idea of where the line is drawn for a top 3 player and a top 6 player. Obviously exceptions, obviously you will have omissions. Depending on where the outliers are, you have anywhere between 15-25 #1 centers in the NHL in any given year. This year the gap was large between McDavid, Crosby, Backstrom and Scheifele. This leads to a lower amount of top 3 centers, where it was about 15 of them. This means that the NHL had only about 50-55 top 6 centers, with 35-40 centers being top 6 but not top 3.

This isn't a science class. Nothing I just proposed is anywhere near a science. However as far as my understanding of hockey, a 49 point center is not a top 6 player, especially not on a team that is starved of consistent offence.

If you think having a #2 center at 49 points, is good... You must clearly be happy with the work Marc Bergevin has done with this franchise...

 

[Sorinth]

At what point do we stop relying on a preconceived idea of the player and actually take his production seriously?

He comes in right behind Pacioretty at ES over the last two years, and in those two years he spent a majority of this time on the fourth line. So we have a player, a center, producing at first line rates at even strength.

Obviously, the truth probably is in between these two extremes. Hes obviously not a first liner but hes also pretty far from being a 3rd liner. Especially when you consider that most 3rd line C have around half his ES production over the same timeframe.

I draw a parallel to Couturier. Hes a player that had high ES production a la Danault, but was relayed on the 2nd wave behind a great PP in Philly, maybe Danault doesnt have it in him to put up the 10-20 points on the PP a year to boost himself up from a 40 points producer to a 50-60 one, but maybe, like Couturier in Philly, he just hasnt had the oppotunity.

Regardless, splitting even strength and PP production makes sense, special teams are a whole other game and you can survive with players like Metropolit and Letestu there.

I agree that he's shown enough to be considered a top-6 player but he didn't spend the majority of his time on the 4th line. He played 13 games to start last year on the 4th line and then was put with Pacioretty, throughout the year he bounced around a bit but he spent less then 30 games in total in the bottom six during this year and last.

What would be interesting to see is if he can play wing and still maintain his production in the top-6. If he can help alleviate the defensive responsibilities and faceoffs for either Drouin or Galchenyuk it would solve a lot of problems for us down the middle.

 

[Sorinth]

You realize that the position a players plays on NHL.com is not actually indicative of where he lines up on the ice? (Drouin is now a C under last years stats. He didn't play center for TB)

You realize the NHL doesn't have 62 top 6 centers? You can take the lazy way out, you can look at the stats in that manner and draw your own conclusions. If I take your way of thinking, that means Connor McDavid at 100 points is a 1st line center and so is Bozak? This doesn't make any sense, does it make sense to you?

Like I said, the Habs don't have a #1 center. That means that your #2 center and #3 center need to step up and produce more. Having a 70 pts #1 and a 60pts #2 is something any team can live with. Have a 60 pt #1 and a 50 pt #2 is a recipe for failure. The Habs don't even have any center that is capable of producing 50 pts... at least not as an NHL center.

The way I calculate is I take ppg for players that have played at least half a season. I take the top 180 players. I average out the top 90 and the next 90. With the average I have a good idea of where the line is drawn for a top 3 player and a top 6 player. Obviously exceptions, obviously you will have omissions. Depending on where the outliers are, you have anywhere between 15-25 #1 centers in the NHL in any given year. This year the gap was large between McDavid, Crosby, Backstrom and Scheifele. This leads to a lower amount of top 3 centers, where it was about 15 of them. This means that the NHL had only about 50-55 top 6 centers, with 35-40 centers being top 6 but not top 3.

This isn't a science class. Nothing I just proposed is anywhere near a science. However as far as my understanding of hockey, a 49 point center is not a top 6 player, especially not on a team that is starved of consistent offence.

If you think having a #2 center at 49 points, is good... You must clearly be happy with the work Marc Bergevin has done with this franchise...

There are 31 1st line centers and 31 2nd line centers in the NHL (Last year it was 30 & 30). That said there are elite 1st line centers, there are average 1st line centers, and there are below average 1st line centers, etc...

The thing to keep in mind is that to be a contender you don't need just any 1st line player, you need the high end 1st liners so that you can compete and beat top teams.