Salary Cap: Danault and Armia in arbitration

[WG]

With less than 200 nhl game under his belt, I think Danault is still in progression and that he can get to a another level, with the potential to become a smart and fast 50-55 points two way center.

Danault lives a dream every day he wakes up since he is playing for the Habs. He loves it in Montreal and wants to play there more than everything. You keep this kind of player as much as you can.

Without a doubt Bergevin is interested to sign him long term and if he can sign him at something around 3.5m for 5-6 years, I'm confident it will quicky become an excellent deal.

Not to pick on you directly, but I've heard Bergy run his yap about this a lot, and a lot of local media and fans are parroting. "We want guys who want to play in Montreal."

Goody good. That would mean a lot more if Bergevin hadn't dicked around on Markov (career Hab who last year chose KHL vs talking to any other NHL team), ran off Subban (who embraced the city and the history of the team like no other player in recent memory) and is in the process of running Max out (who has professed his desire to stay with the Habs and lives in the city year-round).

 

[Gravity]

Give Danault Eller money and give Armia 2mil max

 

[Redux91]

Give Danault Eller money and give Armia 2mil max

I guess its a good thing the judge doesnt check youtube vids lol

but seriously, these contracts probably get resolved early

 

[nhlfan9191]

Some of you will be very disappointed with your "not a penny more than" talk though. Danault is a good, valuable player and will get paid like one. Hertl is a good comparison to use for Danault, IMO, and he got about 5M a year.

Your comparison of players in this specific post is horrible. Think Eller, less proven but cap inflation should put him around $3 million. I’ve said he’d get $3.5-$4 million since spring so I’ll stick with that. Anything less is a good deal.

 

[Deebs]

[tweet]

 

[NotProkofievian]

Mr. ''I can be a 1st line center'' is going to have to accept 3rd line center money.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Danault has 2 years of RFA left. Take the team friendly long term deal now (AAV below $3M) or we give you a one year prove it deal. He has only one full season so far and he produced with Patch. I'd like to see him produce this coming season. Also, We have plenty of options at the 3rd line center position moving forward (Pleky, DLR, Evans, Vejdemo, Olofsson etc). A few months ago, I was ok with giving him Eller money but after looking at his production and RFA status. I would give him a one year deal if he is pushing for a long term deal above $3M AAV.

Anybody know how many minutes (% of his total ice time) Danault played with Patch and Radulov in the 2016/2017 season where he put up 40 pts in 82 games? I suspect its a decent amount of ice time so I think buyer beware in Danault case. We should be very careful with his next contract IMO. It's too early to tell how good or bad he is IMO.

A far as Armia. He too is trying to get a deal with just one good season and he has two more years of RFA left. Like Danault, I am ok with a team friendly deal but if they push hard for a higher AAV, I give him a one year prove it deal.

 

[Le Barron de HF]

Danault has 2 years of RFA left. Take the team friendly long term deal now (AAV below $3M) or we give you a one year prove it deal. He has only one full season so far and he produced with Patch. I'd like to see him produce this coming season. Also, We have plenty of options at the 3rd line center position moving forward (Pleky, DLR, Evans, Vejdemo, Olofsson etc). A few months ago, I was ok with giving him Eller money but after looking at his production and RFA status. I would give him a one year deal if he is pushing for a long term deal above $3M AAV.

A far as Armia. He too is trying to get a deal with just one good season and he has two more years of RFA left. Like Danault, I am ok with a team friendly deal but if they push hard for a higher AAV, I give him a one year prove it deal.

Something like 2.75M on a one year deal? Maybe it's for the best to go short term here. Chances are, based on their upside, Kotkaniemi & Poehling will surpass him on the depth chart. If we give him a long term contract at 3.5-3.75M range and he ends up playing on our bottom six. It'll hurt his value on the market since his production will be in the 25-35 pts range and not many teams will be interested to acquire a player like that at that price range.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Something like 2.75M on a one year deal? Maybe it's for the best to go short term here. Chances are, based on their upside, Kotkaniemi & Poehling will surpass him on the depth chart. If we give him a long term contract at 3.5-3.75M range and he ends up playing on our bottom six. It'll hurt his value on the market since his production will be in the 25-35 pts range and not many teams will be interested to acquire a player like that at that price range.

Not sure what a one year arbitration deal would end up being. For a one year deal, I wouldn't put up too much of a fight for what he would be asking for but we need to be careful with the AAV you give him (Any future contract can't be lower). However, term is something I would be worried about. We need a larger sample size from Danault before we commit long term. If he comes out and puts up solid production numbers not playing with Patch, then he earned it and we have a good situation on our hands.

Mantha just signed for two years at $3.3M AAV. Your one year deal for Danault at $2.75M seams reasonable. The more I think about it, the more I want the one year deal where it gives us a chance to see a larger sample size before we commit long term.

 

[TT1]

4M per season long term, take it and be happy

Armia 2.5M max

 

[Adam Michaels]

Danault's arbitration hearing is on July 20th.

Armia's is on July 25th.

So you think by the 25th, they'll both be signed. I doubt they both go to arbitration.

 

[LaP]

people are throwing out numbers but they need to put them in context. He's not going from 950K to 4 or 5M if you are just buying RFA years, but if you are buying UFA years it all depends on how many you are buying in terms of how much he's going to get paid. So if it's a 2 year deal it's going to be a good bit less then if it's a 4 or 5 year deal in terms of cap hit since you would be buying 2-3 years of UFA.

If it's a 2 years then MB will simply shot himself in the foot. It's written in the sky Julien will stupidly use Danault as a top 6 center so with this TOI he'll get his 40-45 points and in 2 years he'll ask for 2c money.

 

[Forsead]

If it's a 2 years then MB will simply shot himself in the foot. It's written in the sky Julien will stupidly use Danault as a top 6 center so with this TOI he'll get his 40-45 points and in 2 years he'll ask for 2c money.

This is not stupid who the hell do you want Julien to play has a top 6 center ? He got nobody to work with. I mean Danault is the best natural center on this team...

This is on Bergevin

 

[lamp9post]

Danault's arbitration hearing is on July 20th.

Armia's is on July 25th.

So you think by the 25th, they'll both be signed. I doubt they both go to arbitration.

I doubt Danault goes to arbitration. I think the team and Danault himself want a long-term deal here. If you look at the deals Bergevin has made with our forwards, there are several examples (Gallagher, Pacioretty, Shaw, Drouin) of signings that lock up guys through their mid/late-20's. Danault is 25 and IMO really has nothing left to prove on a bridge deal. We know what he brings and C is a position of need. I really see a 5/6 year deal for him, probably for more than we would like but Danault has leverage given our lack of depth at his position. I'm guessing a 6 year deal in the $4.5M range.

Re: Armia, I have no idea. He's not as proven, so he could very well go to arbitration. I could see also see the Habs interested in a value contract to lock him up (similar to the names cited above - Armia is also 25 like Danault) through his 20's. I could see something like a 5-year/$15M deal and I could also see them settling on the arbitration deal.

 

[montreal]

If it's a 2 years then MB will simply shot himself in the foot. It's written in the sky Julien will stupidly use Danault as a top 6 center so with this TOI he'll get his 40-45 points and in 2 years he'll ask for 2c money.

not really worried if it's 2 years, MB and Julien will hopefully be gone, Poehling and Kotka could be on the way by then. If he does well and MB is fired they could just trade him at some point.

 

[WG]

I doubt Danault goes to arbitration. I think the team and Danault himself want a long-term deal here. If you look at the deals Bergevin has made with our forwards, there are several examples (Gallagher, Pacioretty, Shaw, Drouin) of signings that lock up guys through their mid/late-20's. Danault is 25 and IMO really has nothing left to prove on a bridge deal. We know what he brings and C is a position of need. I really see a 5/6 year deal for him, probably for more than we would like but Danault has leverage given our lack of depth at his position. I'm guessing a 6 year deal in the $4.5M range.

Re: Armia, I have no idea. He's not as proven, so he could very well go to arbitration. I could see also see the Habs interested in a value contract to lock him up (similar to the names cited above - Armia is also 25 like Danault) through his 20's. I could see something like a 5-year/$15M deal and I could also see them settling on the arbitration deal.

Way too much term and AAV for both guys. If Danault actually wanted 4.5M on a long term deal then he should be given a 1 year arb contract and then traded as part of a package to acquire a legit top 6 F or top 4 D.

Armia's best season was last year at 29 points, no way he's worth anywhere close to 3M and certainly not for 5 years.