Player Discussion Phillip Danault part 2

[Natey]

1999 Mike Peca.

Second on his team ins coring. 56 points in the regular season.. 13 in the playoffs. 69 points in 101 games. Compared at 26 points in 69 games. One of those is a 56 point per 82 game pace (including playoffs) against a 31 point season pace (including playoffs). One of them was also in the clutch and grab NHL. That's not even comparable.

 

[Natey]

How do you explain his production since 2016-17 then? I'd say it's pretty good for a guy with "no offence".

I mean.. 43 points (per 82 average) for someone getting first like C minutes isn't really "pretty good."

 

[Roadhouse]

Second on his team ins coring. 56 points in the regular season.. 13 in the playoffs. 69 points in 101 games. Compared at 26 points in 69 games. One of those is a 56 point per 82 game pace (including playoffs) against a 31 point season pace (including playoffs). One of them was also in the clutch and grab NHL. That's not even comparable.

Who cares? One is a COVID-compressed, North Division season and the other is not. You got anything else while we're at it?

Lol supreme defensive ability, minimal offensive contributions. Mike Peca. Spin your stats away.

 

[canucklover123]

Nick Bonino got 4.1 for 4 coming off Pittsburgh run as the go to defensive guy to be a 3C ultimately in Nashville. Relatively same age when signing

phil gets 5 easy off that comparison

 

[Natey]

Who cares? One is a COVID-compressed, North Division season and the other is not. You got anything else while we're at it?

Lol supreme defensive ability, minimal offensive contributions. Mike Peca. Spin your stats away.

LOL maybe end of his career Michael Peca

 

[Roadhouse]

LOL maybe end of his career Michael Peca

I went for '99 because of age, and '03 would be the most reflective. Sure. If those are our debates now, HF Habs is all roses and buckets of joy.

 

[Natey]

Nick Bonino got 4.1 for 4 coming off Pittsburgh run as the go to defensive guy to be a 3C ultimately in Nashville. Relatively same age when signing

phil gets 5 easy off that comparison

It was a pretty short term deal though at 4 years (which they also traded away). If Danault is willing to take less than 5 years, he'll cash in for sure.

 

[Natey]

I went for '99 because of age, and '03 would be the most reflective. Sure. If those are our debates now, HF Habs is all roses and buckets of joy.

In 99 - Mike Peca was a great hockey player who won a Gold Medal for Team Canada and also captained Team Canada. Phil Danault is a good one, but not a great one.

 

[BLONG7]

I once heard media comparing Danault with Pageau and it started an endless comparison between both players here on this board. Why don't we agree to end this bs comparison for the benefit of this board. They are not the same type of player at all, it's a total waste of time. I prefer listening to the media, they stopped comparing both players because they know hockey and they are professionals.

If we all look back, I believe it was Phil's agent who started ALL of the comparisons, using Pageau as the measuring stick............so maybe ask him to shut down the comparisons? Afterall, it was a bet Phil's agent lost...
Shutdown guy who hopefully will stay for a reasonable contract and term......that's what has become of our Phil.
Hope we can make it work.....

Bottom line is here, you and all of the Phil supporters really should embrace the same idea....Team first!!

 

[ECWHSWI]

How do you explain his production since 2016-17 then? I'd say it's pretty good for a guy with "no offence".

being used as the #1 C
- cracked the 50 pts mark ONCE
- barely used on the PP
- 1 goal in 32 PO games
- 0.22 PPG in the PO
- never reached 15 goals in the NHL
- was below 0.5PPG this season


so, please tell me, what do you mean by "pretty good" ? are you talking about his 0.13 PPG these PO ? or his 0 goals ?

 

[Archijerej]

I mean.. 43 points (per 82 average) for someone getting first like C minutes isn't really "pretty good."

He was not getting "first like C minutes".

 

[ECWHSWI]

He was not getting "first like C minutes".

17-18 : 3rd most used forward, most used C
18-19 : most used forward
19-20 : 2nd most used behind Kovalchuk
20-21 : 3rd most used forward, 2nd most used C


no worries, I know you'll find something to justify his 0.22 career PPG in the PO and his 0 goals and 2 assists in 16 PO games this year.

 

[Archijerej]

being used as the #1 C

Not in terms of icetime he wasn't.

- cracked the 50 pts mark ONCE

So we're just going to pretend he wouldn't have done it last season?

barely used on the PP

And still being able to produce at above 0,5 PPG during those seasons? Are you trying to make an argument FOR Danault?

- 0.22 PPG in the

I explained to you what is the reason for that.

so, please tell me, what do you mean by "pretty good" ?

I did. You just refuse to listen.

 

[Archijerej]

17-18 : 3rd most used forward, most used C
18-19 : most used forward
19-20 : 2nd most used behind Kovalchuk
20-21 : 3rd most used forward, 2nd most used C


no worries, I know you'll find something to justify his 0.22 career PPG in the PO and his 0 goals and 2 assists in 16 PO games this year.

And now go and compare those minutes league-wide.

 

[habdynasty]

There was a stat on tv before the last that showed Danault is the lowest scoring forward with the most minutes played in the last 20 years in the playoffs. He may set some records yet.

 

[ECWHSWI]

Not in terms of icetime he wasn't.



So we're just going to pretend he wouldn't have done it last season?




And still being able to produce at above 0,5 PPG during those seasons? Are you trying to make an argument FOR Danault?



I explained to you what is the reason for that.



I did. You just refuse to listen.

Dude, the guy has 2 assists in 16 PO games, NO GOALS. he has a career 0.22 PPG in the PO. his own coaches do not think he's good enough offensively to be part of the PP, Julien, Ducharme and now Richardson do not use him on the PP.

Our PP sucked for a long time, don't you think if Phil the thrill was pretty good offensively he would have been used there ? come on now...


justifictation.

 

[ECWHSWI]

And now go and compare those minutes league-wide.

so, what you're saying is if I look at other teams stats for 18-19 (for example) he wont be our most used forward anymore ? or is it just something new (as predicted lol) to justify fact he sucks offensively ?

 

[Archijerej]

so, what you're saying is if I look at other teams stats for 18-19 (for example) he wont be our most used forward anymore ? or is it just something new (as predicted lol) to justify fact he sucks offensively ?

At this point all I'm going to say is that you're a rather tedious fella, with whom there's no point having a discussion.

 

[canucklover123]

And now go and compare those minutes league-wide.

was just gunna say lol

 

[canucklover123]

so, what you're saying is if I look at other teams stats for 18-19 (for example) he wont be our most used forward anymore ? or is it just something new (as predicted lol) to justify fact he sucks offensively ?

so he’s discredited for picking up points with MTL because he’s in a situation that is only pertinent in MtL where he gets better wingers.....


But now when we say compare him his minutes against the league for “ top line c”, it doesn’t matter because because it’s not a fair relation to the league .

Shoutout to all the double standards out here

 

[ECWHSWI]

At this point all I'm going to say is that you're a rather tedious fella, with whom there's no point having a discussion.

Dude, you're trying to convince me (and others) that 2 assists in 16 games is -> pretty good <- the guy has yet to have ONE good PO run offensively since being a Hab, just one...

the guy produce shit in the PO and is average at his very best offensively during regular season

not average, or ok, or decent or good nope. -> pretty good <-


safe to say you don't really want to have a discussion anyway.

 

[Whitesnake]

17-18 : 3rd most used forward, most used C
18-19 : most used forward
19-20 : 2nd most used behind Kovalchuk
20-21 : 3rd most used forward, 2nd most used C


no worries, I know you'll find something to justify his 0.22 career PPG in the PO and his 0 goals and 2 assists in 16 PO games this year.

I understand your point. And it should not have been like that. But people like to throw first-line icetime for Danault as if we're talking a McDavid type of gap between the other players.

This year, Danault is the 2nd most used C. But in the league, he's 62nd. We have to stop throwing those 1st line minutes statement. Yes, we still can throw the he shouldn't be playing on that line, should be playing less icetime and so on....but that Habs team relies on playing a close to even amount of icetime at least compared to players that play REAL 1st line minutes like McDavid and Co.

 

[ECWHSWI]

I understand your point. And it should not have been like that. But people like to throw first-line icetime for Danault as if we're talking a McDavid type of gap between the other players.

This year, Danault is the 2nd most used C. But in the league, he's 62nd. We have to stop throwing those 1st line minutes statement. Yes, we still can throw the he shouldn't be playing on that line, should be playing less icetime and so on....but that Habs team relies on playing a close to even amount of icetime at least compared to players that play REAL 1st line minutes like McDavid and Co.

I'm not those people, thank you.

 

[Wats]

Man if he can sign for around 4.25M long term, would help this organization out so much. He can have all the endorsements here he wants that he probably won't get elsewhere.

 

[CristianoRonaldo]

You might want to look at the poll oh great one. Suzuki and Danault are 1 and 2. Remove either one from the lineup and it becomes a big problem.

Suzuki is capital to the team, because he's a true two-way centre, a defensive centre like Danault is helping us a lot these playoffs, but he's not hard to replace.