Recalled/Assigned: Danault Recalled 12/18/15

[CallMeShaft]

It wasn't just you. Similar speeds and movement between the two players. One of the reasons I'd like to see him be given a chance on the top line.

 

[Kaners PPGs]

I've said it before, but I wouldn't mind giving him a shot at 1LW.

Sure, he's been one heck of a 3C, but that hole on the top line is a much bigger deal to me, and Danault happens to be a natural LW. Not to mention that his defense and speed would do well with guys like Toews and Hossa.

Just something I'd like to see Q try next time the blender gets turned on.

I was thinking this too. Plus, TT, Desi, Shaw has potential to add some goals at the 3rd line.

But the other reason Danault's play is so encouraging is that it allows the Hawks to shore up the 1LW with a trade and then move Shaw to the 4th line where he is elite. Going into the playoffs with an improved 1st line allows the Hawks to roll lines nearly as strong as last season:
19, 81, new LW (significantly improved production; shutdown the opposing top line)
Anisimov, Panarin, Kane (money; bum slayers)
Denault, Desi, TT (sneaky, productive, and improving)
Kruger, Shaw, Garbutt (grit, shutdown, energy, special team specialists)

 

[Chelios]

Been pegging him as a Kruger but starting to wonder if he might be a young Bolland.

I actually think Vermette is a pretty good comparison for Danault. He is much faster and better offensively than I realized.

 

[Toews2Bickell]

It wasn't just you. Similar speeds and movement between the two players. One of the reasons I'd like to see him be given a chance on the top line.

This actually isn't a bad idea as I think he played some LW in Rockford. However, I don't want to mess with the lines right now and I'm not sure who they slot in at 3C. Perhaps if deadline deals for a LW isn't in their price range then they can try this out once Kruger returns.

 

[TweetyLeaf]

Been pegging him as a Kruger but starting to wonder if he might be a young Bolland.

I've been talking about this a long time with my friends. He is not there yet, but as a huge Dave Bolland fan I can tell you their game is surprisingly similar. Danault doesn't have the edge in his game like Bolland does, but he is better skater.

People thinking he should be moved to LW are nuts.

He won best defensive forward award in juniors playing C.

I believe Danault will be elite 3C in future, and he should be handled as such. No moving to wing, no forcing 2C position, just let him concentrate on "his own game".

Look how that position shuffling is affecting Teuvo this year?

Younger dudes need some time and peace to get comfy in their "own spot" in NHL to develop properly, I have been firm believer of this. Hawks shuffle those youngsters too much from wing to wing or C to wing or whatever.

Oh, and the moment he scores that SC winning goal, Stan will trade him. Just because.

 

[clydesdale line]

People thinking he should be moved to LW are nuts.

He won best defensive forward award in juniors playing C.

Agreed completely. I was scratching my head with people saying that. Kid is very good defensively already. He'll probably be elite in the not too distant future as a centermen.

 

[CallMeShaft]

I've been talking about this a long time with my friends. He is not there yet, but as a huge Dave Bolland fan I can tell you their game is surprisingly similar. Danault doesn't have the edge in his game like Bolland does, but he is better skater.

People thinking he should be moved to LW are nuts.

He won best defensive forward award in juniors playing C.

I believe Danault will be elite 3C in future, and he should be handled as such. No moving to wing, no forcing 2C position, just let him concentrate on "his own game".

Look how that position shuffling is affecting Teuvo this year?

Younger dudes need some time and peace to get comfy in their "own spot" in NHL to develop properly, I have been firm believer of this. Hawks shuffle those youngsters too much from wing to wing or C to wing or whatever.

Oh, and the moment he scores that SC winning goal, Stan will trade him. Just because.

First, don't you start calling me crazy...

And Teuvo was out of position at LW. Danault was originally a LW when the Hawks drafted him, and would be a better option than Shaw.

And don't get me wrong, I like Danault at 3C, but I'd rather have a hole at 3C than at 1LW. Lesser of two evils.

 

[TweetyLeaf]

First, don't you start calling me crazy...

And Teuvo was out of position at LW. Danault was originally a LW when the Hawks drafted him, and would be a better option than Shaw.

And don't get me wrong, I like Danault at 3C, but I'd rather have a hole at 3C than at 1LW. Lesser of two evils.

Then you don't have your priorities straight.

One line does not a team make.

Center depth has been maybe the most important position in all Stanley Cup success stories. Just look @ winning teams 3 centers from past 10 years. All center players played large role in winning SC. Including Hawks. Pahlsson, Madden, Bolland, Richards, Vermette...

Again, atleast 3 good center's win SC's. Be my guest and look into it.

I rather have that hole in LW than in center.

Our center's this year come playoffs are hopefully as follows (depends if Kruger gets healthy in time and how is he's game):

Toews
Anisimov
Danault
Kruger

You take Danault to LW and what then? You going to go in with this:

Toews
Anisimov
Kruger
Rasmussen

?`

You need atleast 3 good center's to win SC. Let Danault be our new defensive star, and don't start to make him something he ain't (1st line LW).

 

[DPHawk]

Then you don't have your priorities straight.

One line does not a team make.

Center depth has been maybe the most important position in all Stanley Cup success stories. Just look @ winning teams 3 centers from past 10 years. All center players played large role in winning SC. Including Hawks. Pahlsson, Madden, Bolland, Richards, Vermette...

Again, atleast 3 good center's win SC's. Be my guest and look into it.

I rather have that hole in LW than in center.

Our center's this year come playoffs are hopefully as follows (depends if Kruger gets healthy in time and how is he's game):

Toews
Anisimov
Danault
Kruger

You take Danault to LW and what then? You going to go in with this:

Toews
Anisimov
Kruger
Rasmussen

?`

You need atleast 3 good center's to win SC. Let Danault be our new defensive star, and don't start to make him something he ain't (1st line LW).

Uh the centers in '13 were Toews, Zus, Shaw, Kruger (who was solid but not the player he was in '14, '15). I'm not seeing anything close to 3 good centers.

 

[Pepe Silvia]

Danault needs to stay at center. It's looking more and more like he'll be the 3C for a long time.

 

[TweetyLeaf]

Uh the centers in '13 were Toews, Zus, Shaw, Kruger (who was solid but not the player he was in '14, '15). I'm not seeing anything close to 3 good centers.

So the SC winning goal was scored by Dman? Or maybe the coach?

 

[CallMeShaft]

Firstly, I originally said I'd like him to be given the chance at the position next time the blender comes out. Doesn't hurt to see if he fits the role. It's not like he'll forget how to play center if he fails.

Secondly, if he works on the top line, I'd have Kruger as a 3C and Desjardins as 4C. Desi is a natural center, and played the role of 4C for the Sharks.

Lastly, we had Handzus (not a 2C at the time) and Shaw (better at wing) as centers during the 2013 cup run. Center depth isn't something this team has been known for during these recent cup years.

 

[bwana63]

First, don't you start calling me crazy...

And Teuvo was out of position at LW. Danault was originally a LW when the Hawks drafted him, and would be a better option than Shaw.

And don't get me wrong, I like Danault at 3C, but I'd rather have a hole at 3C than at 1LW. Lesser of two evils.

+infinity

This is a gamble, to be sure, but why not try it? It's not as if Danault hasn't played LW before. Desi's played center, flank him with Shaw and TT. That could be a good line. Danault could be an in-house answer at 1LW. Better to find out soon, before the deadline. If it works out, the Hawks can address other needs or actually keep a little space for the coming crunch.

Make no mistake about it, Danault's long term position is 3C. But the 1LW hole just might be solved in-house. Roll da bones. Nothing to lose.

 

[TweetyLeaf]

Firstly, I originally said I'd like him to be given the chance at the position next time the blender comes out. Doesn't hurt to see if he fits the role. It's not like he'll forget how to play center if he fails.

Teuvo forgot how to play that RW.
And yes it does hurt a player to switch to a new position and back again.

Lastly, we had Handzus (not a 2C at the time) and Shaw (better at wing) as centers during the 2013 cup run. Center depth isn't something this team has been known for during these recent cup years.

And Bolland was our 5th C ? We had 5 lines? wow...

I am not gonna start arguing about '13 centers when neither of you did not even mention the guy who got the GWG on SC deciding game.

And yes if you go 10 years back, that might be the worst center core that still managed to win the SC. But it does not make my point invalid because you should really check those 9 other years.

I have no patience for this conversation, if you people don't even try to think the points I try to make.

If you don't believe me when I am telling you that shuffling line mates around and different position don't hurt players fine, ask players then.

Until then, I have nothing more to add.

 

[RememberTheRoar]

Firstly, I originally said I'd like him to be given the chance at the position next time the blender comes out. Doesn't hurt to see if he fits the role. It's not like he'll forget how to play center if he fails.

Secondly, if he works on the top line, I'd have Kruger as a 3C and Desjardins as 4C. Desi is a natural center, and played the role of 4C for the Sharks.

Lastly, we had Handzus (not a 2C at the time) and Shaw (better at wing) as centers during the 2013 cup run. Center depth isn't something this team has been known for during these recent cup years.

Not to derail this conversation, but I think people forget about Desjardins being a natural center (I know I did until you mentioned it). Could he potentially slot down to 4C next season to take Kruger's role?

 

[thesaadfather]

So the SC winning goal was scored by Dman? Or maybe the coach?

Wasn't Bolland demoted to 4LW?

 

[JaegerDice]

Teuvo forgot how to play that RW.
And yes it does hurt a player to switch to a new position and back again.



And Bolland was our 5th C ? We had 5 lines? wow...

I am not gonna start arguing about '13 centers when neither of you did not even mention the guy who got the GWG on SC deciding game. .

...Bolland was 4c that year.

Toews
Handzus
Shaw
Bolland


....I'm not seeing the problem with his run-down.

Kruger played wing after Bolland was demoted down the lineup.

That said, NOBODY should use 2013 as anything other than a wistful dream for future Blackhawks teams. If you use them as a benchmark, you will be disappointed in what you see on the ice, every year. We will never see a team play puck-possession hockey as borderline perfect as that team, never see the relentless pace, discipline and puck pursuit throughout the entire roster, never see a team with so many guys hit career numbers in shooting percentage, never see a confluence of matured youth, fresh youth looking to be served, and aged veterans putting everything they had on the ice for one last shot, as that team, again.

It was magic. Be happy you were around to see it, keep your PVR recordings safe, and break them out when it's time to indoctrinate the next generation into Hawks fandom.

2010 is honestly a much more reachable, repeatable goal than 2013 as far as lineup depth and performance.

 

[Pepe Silvia]

I wouldn't be outraged or anything over trying Danault on the first line, but the third line has been playing really well and Danault is a big reason why. IMO he should continue to develop where he's meant to play. Shaw isn't ideal on the first line, but the Hawks are winning, Toews' production has really picked up lately, and they have plenty of time to make a trade. I really like the center depth Danault brings to the bottom 6, and his spot in the lineup doesn't need to be messed with right now.

 

[CallMeShaft]

Teuvo forgot how to play that RW.
And yes it does hurt a player to switch to a new position and back again.



And Bolland was our 5th C ? We had 5 lines? wow...

I am not gonna start arguing about '13 centers when neither of you did not even mention the guy who got the GWG on SC deciding game.

And yes if you go 10 years back, that might be the worst center core that still managed to win the SC. But it does not make my point invalid because you should really check those 9 other years.

I have no patience for this conversation, if you people don't even try to think the points I try to make.

If you don't believe me when I am telling you that shuffling line mates around and different position don't hurt players fine, ask players then.

Until then, I have nothing more to add.

Teuvo has done fine recently as 3RW. He's looked like I expect him to look like on that line.

And I didn't feel I needed to comment on Bolland. He was a legitimate center for us. So, in the same way I didn't bring up Toews, I wasn't going to bring up Bolland.

But with him and Toews, that was only two good centers for that team. If Kruger comes back healthy (and Danault is moved to wing), we'll have three good centers on this team.

And even though we lost in 2014, we were able to make it to game 7 OT against the Kings. Our center depth than consisted of a Handzus who shouldn't have been playing and Shaw.

If Kane didn't get injured last year, Vermette wouldn't have been on this team. And without him, our center depth last year would have been **** as well.

And again, I'm not advocating for Danault as a top line LW. But if the decision is between him and Shaw, I wouldn't hate him being given a chance.

He reminds me a bit of Vermette last year, and Vermette played well enough with Toews and Hossa for a week or two last year. Vermette was moved back to center due in large part to his performance at the dot, one of the few areas Danault is severely lacking ATM.

And lastly, we currently lack LW depth. Maybe Panik will thrive in the roll, but if he doesn't we don't have many other choices other than Shaw/Garbutt/Bickell (all bottom 6ers), Dano/Teuvo (both of which are RWs), and Danault. Ross is the best NHL ready LW prospect we have, and he'll only ever be a bottom 6 forward.

So, don't hate me for suggesting Danault be given a chance. Everyone else has tried and failed already.

 

[DPHawk]

...Bolland was 4c that year.

Toews
Handzus
Shaw
Bolland


....I'm not seeing the problem with his run-down.

Kruger played wing after Bolland was demoted down the lineup.

That said, NOBODY should use 2013 as anything other than a wistful dream for future Blackhawks teams. If you use them as a benchmark, you will be disappointed in what you see on the ice, every year. We will never see a team play puck-possession hockey as borderline perfect as that team, never see the relentless pace, discipline and puck pursuit throughout the entire roster, never see a team with so many guys hit career numbers in shooting percentage, never see a confluence of matured youth, fresh youth looking to be served, and aged veterans putting everything they had on the ice for one last shot, as that team, again.

It was magic. Be happy you were around to see it, keep your PVR recordings safe, and break them out when it's time to indoctrinate the next generation into Hawks fandom.

2010 is honestly a much more reachable, repeatable goal than 2013 as far as lineup depth and performance.

The success of the 2013 team only bolsters the argument that center is not as important as tweetyleaf is making it out to be. It was our worst center depth by far and it was probably our best team. So if Danault is a fit with Toews and Hossa I'd rather him play there than be be the 3C.

And yeah, I looked at the faceoff numbers (sidenote: I forgot how bad we were getting killed at the dot) and it looks like Bolland was playing center pretty much the whole run. He doesn't say much for our depth at the position though, he was probably the worst forward on the team against Detroit and LA.

 

[Gootie]

It's a lot easier to be passable down the middle when you have the best group of wingers in the entire league like the 2013 team.

 

[JaegerDice]

The success of the 2013 team only bolsters the argument that center is not as important as tweetyleaf is making it out to be. It was our worst center depth by far and it was probably our best team. So if Danault is a fit with Toews and Hossa I'd rather him play there than be be the 3C.

And yeah, I looked at the faceoff numbers (sidenote: I forgot how bad we were getting killed at the dot) and it looks like Bolland was playing center pretty much the whole run. He doesn't say much for our depth at the position though, he was probably the worst forward on the team against Detroit and LA.

I look at it the other way.

I think that 2013 was such an outlier in performance, exacerbated by the inherent weirdness of a shortened season, that there are few applicable lessons to learn...other than 'this is what perfect hockey looks like, good luck replicating it for 82 games plus playoffs'.

I don't think you can take the lesson 'the 2013 team succeeded with weak center depth, therefore you dont need center depth' very far. I think that was a special team from a weird season. Yes, if roughly every single player outside the bottom 3 C positions is outperforming their career bests to date, you might be able to make it work.

Other than that very specific scenario, I think you'd be safer pushing for as much C depth ad possible.

 

[DPHawk]

It's a lot easier to be passable down the middle when you have the best group of wingers in the entire league like the 2013 team.

I get that. The defensive depth was way better than what we have this year too.

But I'd rather be set at 1LW than set at 3C, especially since Kruger will be back for the playoffs, so we should have the centers we need when he's back.

All that said, I'm not in a huge rush to try Danault at wing. I just don't think we need to take it off the table.

 

[DPHawk]

I look at it the other way.

I think that 2013 was such an outlier in performance, exacerbated by the inherent weirdness of a shortened season, that there are few applicable lessons to learn...other than 'this is what perfect hockey looks like, good luck replicating it for 82 games plus playoffs'.

I don't think you can take the lesson 'the 2013 team succeeded with weak center depth, therefore you dont need center depth' very far. I think that was a special team from a weird season. Yes, if roughly every single player outside the bottom 3 C positions is outperforming their career bests to date, you might be able to make it work.

Other than that very specific scenario, I think you'd be safer pushing for as much C depth ad possible.

Even without Danault, were much better at center than 2013. Anisimov is way better than Zus, Kruger (assuming he regains '14, '15 form) is better than '13 Bolland, and Shaw is still here and is a better faceoff man that '13. Throw in Desi, TT, and a few Rockford guys and there's enough there to move Danault if it makes sense. Ultimately I think he's at center in the playoffs but a tryout at wing shouldn't be a problem considering everything else that's been tried with Toews/Hossa.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

Bolland was playing left wing on that line in 13 by the end.