Player Discussion Phil "The thrill", "Pizza man" Danault (Part 4) - The Final Edition

[Belial]

Context, if it matters for Danault, it should matter for Kotkaniemi too, no?

Yet you seem to only want to apply context when it's convenient to whatever you're arguing.

But again...I'M disingenuous.

Let's remember, I'm not even debating that Kotmaniemi is a good PP player, I just found it funny how in your original post you knocked someone for expecting a 3rd line C to get 40pts...

Yet you constantly shit on KK for being a 30pt player.

But again...I'M disingenuous.

Lol

Of course, you're disingenuous!

You're trying to argue against facts and make us believe that KK was not getting plenty of PP time while we all saw him be the main piece on that second wave the whole year.

 

[417]

Of course, you're disingenuous!

You're trying to argue against facts and make us believe that KK was not getting plenty of PP time while we all saw him be the main piece on that second wave the whole year.

I never said anything about him not getting plenty of PP time...

I said he was 8th, which is a verifiable fact.

Whatever conclusion you get from that is your own.

As for him being the "main piece" of the 2nd unit.

That's cute.

 

[Belial]

I never said anything about him not getting plenty of PP time...

I said he was 8th, which is a verifiable fact.

Whatever conclusion you get from that is your own.

As for him being the "main piece" of the 2nd unit.

That's cute.

So this was not your post ehh?

Plenty of PP time?

Firstly, the Habs PP sucked

Secondly, he was 8th amongst Habs forwards in PP TOI/g.

Why would you expect one of the least used forwards on the PP, to be productive on a bottom 1/3 PP unit???

Once more...you're expecting one of the least used forwards to put up 1st line production.

The problem wasn't Kotkaniemi...its fans who have have unfair and unrealistic expectations.

And your 8th in TOI/GP doesn't have any weight when all the 8 players are in the 2 minutes per game range.

That's why I said you're disingenuous.

All you're trying to do by keep bringing the 8th thing is make people believe that he didn't really get that much PP time which is not true at all.

He was on one of the two waves of the PP the entire year. There's no arguing there.

 

[417]

So this was not your post ehh?

You realize I'm quoting YOU right?

YOU said he got plenty of PP time.

I just added the context to YOUR comment.

And your 8th in TOI/GP doesn't have any weight when all the 8 players are in the 2 minutes per game range.

That's why I said you're disingenuous.

But that's where he was ranked, you're free to frame it however you want, but when YOU say PLENTY...

The facts say different.

All you're trying to do by keep bringing the 8th thing is make people believe that he didn't really get that much PP time which is not true at all.

He was on one of the two waves of the PP the entire year. There's no arguing there.

But he really didn't get that much PP time, nor was he someone the PP was built around.

So to me, it's odd to point out the fact that one of the lesser used forwards on the PP, wasn't productive, on what was a very bad PP.

That's all I'm saying...but you're really just deflecting from the original post.

Which was again ..you pointing out how ridiculous it was to expect 40pts from a 3rd liner.

It's not my fault your words came back to bite you in the ass.

 

[417]

30-40 points without any PP time is more like a #2 center, to be honest.

I think people overestimate real production that's going on in the league.

Depends on the system you're playing also...

If you roll 4 lines and your #1 center gets 60 points, don't you think it's kinda crazy to expect 40 points out of your #3 center?

Went back to your original post and also found the bolded curious given the context of our current discussion.

Should I bother pointing out the irony?

 

[Whitesnake]

Are we still talking about the guy? lol. Weren't we eager to see him out of here?

 

[HabsWhiteKnightLOL]

Are we still talking about the guy? lol. Weren't we eager to see him out of here?

Damn right , no more Phil Danault talks for 3hours during gameday on RDS and TSN.

It's a blessing

 

[Belial]

You realize I'm quoting YOU right?

YOU said he got plenty of PP time.

I just added the context to YOUR comment.

What was the point of your response then if not disagreeing with me saying he got plenty of PP time?

But he really didn't get that much PP time, nor was he someone the PP was built around.

So to me, it's odd to point out the fact that one of the lesser used forwards on the PP, wasn't productive, on what was a very bad PP.

That's all I'm saying...but you're really just deflecting from the original post.

Which was again ..you pointing out how ridiculous it was to expect 40pts from a 3rd liner.

It's not my fault your words came back to bite you in the ass.

Jesus man...

Here are the full PP TOI/GP for our players:

Toffoli 2:25
Suzuki 2:24
Drouin 2:17
Perry 2:08
Tatar 2:01
Gally 1:57
Anderson 1:54
KK 1:54

You do realize that the difference between first and last is minimal right?

You saying he was 8th in TOI over and over is just arguing to argue.

Yes factually it's true but it doesn't take an Einstein brain to see that we used 8 forwards on 2 waves pretty equally.

 

[417]

What was the point of your response then if not disagreeing with me saying he got plenty of PP time?

This

Jesus man...

Here are the full PP TOI/GP for our players:

Toffoli 2:25
Suzuki 2:24
Drouin 2:17
Perry 2:08
Tatar 2:01
Gally 1:57
Anderson 1:54
KK 1:54

You do realize that the difference between first and last is minimal right?

And that...

Don't correspond together...you can't on one hand argue he had "plenty of time" while simultaneously posting TOI that shows he got the least.

Nevermind acknowledging that the PP, as a whole, was not productive.

You saying he was 8th in TOI over and over is just arguing to argue.

No, it's producing the context you seem only capable of applying when it's convenient.

Yes factually it's true but it doesn't take an Einstein brain to see that we used 8 forwards on 2 waves pretty equally.

So like you said... factually, it's true.

So what are we arguing here? Once more, you deflected from the original talking point, all to say that what I said was true.

May as well have not replied.

 

[Belial]

This


And that...

Don't correspond together...you can't on one hand argue he had "plenty of time" while simultaneously posting TOI that shows he got the least.

Nevermind acknowledging that the PP, as a whole, was not productive.


No, it's producing the context you seem only capable of applying when it's convenient.


So like you said... factually, it's true.

So what are we arguing here? Once more, you deflected from the original talking point, all to say that what I said was true.

May as well have not replied.

Aight we're done here.

If you don't think 2 minutes per game on PP is enough to produce some PP points I can't help you.

And if you don't see the difference between no PP time and 2 minutes per game then you're actually a lost cause.

 

[417]

Aight we're done here.

If you don't think 2 minutes per game on PP is enough to produce some PP points I can't help you.

When did I ever say this? Lol

And if you don't see the difference between no PP time and 2 minutes per game then you're actually a lost cause.

Again...you're making up narratives that I haven't argued lol.

Once more...don't blame me because your own words came back to haunt you.

I just held up the mirror, don't be mad at me cause you don't like the reflection.

 

[Belial]

Once more...don't blame me because your own words came back to haunt you.

What words came back to haunt me exactly?

 

[417]

What words came back to haunt me exactly?

I already quoted you twice. You tried to move the discussion in a different direction without ever addressing it.

Either way... whatever, he's gone.

I couldn't care less about Kotkaniemi anymore or Danault for that matter.

 

[canucklover123]

When did I ever say this? Lol


Again...you're making up narratives that I haven't argued lol.

Once more...don't blame me because your own words came back to haunt you.

I just held up the mirror, don't be mad at me cause you don't like the reflection.

You literally responded to @Belial right here ... he's not making it up lol

Plenty of PP time?

Firstly, the Habs PP sucked

Secondly, he was 8th amongst Habs forwards in PP TOI/g.

Why would you expect one of the least used forwards on the PP, to be productive on a bottom 1/3 PP unit???

Once more...you're expecting one of the least used forwards to put up 1st line production.

The problem wasn't Kotkaniemi...its fans who have have unfair and unrealistic expectations.

Arguing about being 8th on PP TOI/g is a a horrid argument seeing as how it was indicated the difference between 8th and 4 other players is a grand 12 seconds.

He had opportunity on the PP and he didn't capitalize, yes the PP wasnt good, but he was given the op...maybe it was in part bad because KK was on it.

Anyway 6.1M for that lol, not our problem anymore.

 

[Belial]

I already quoted you twice. You tried to move the discussion in a different direction without ever addressing it.

Either way... whatever, he's gone.

I couldn't care less about Kotkaniemi anymore or Danault for that matter.

You quoted me a ton of times I still never understood what was the irony or what words exactly were supposed to come back haunting me...

KK was being sheltered as hell getting soft minutes and consistent PP time since he's been in the league.

How is that not a good environment to progress/develop?

The idea that Lehkonen and Byron are worse than the dudes he would've got as linemates in Finland is just insanity!

 

[417]

You literally responded to @Belial right here ... he's not making it up lol

Where in my post am I arguing that's 2mins of TOI isn't enough to produce?

In fact I haven't said a single thing about his ability to produce on the PP.

Arguing about being 8th on PP TOI/g is a a horrid argument seeing as how it was indicated the difference between 8th and 4 other players is a grand 12 seconds.

But I didn't argue that because it can't be argued...it is a fact. He was 8th in average toi per game.

You can check for yourself...whatever conclusion you gather from that is also your own.

He had opportunity on the PP and he didn't capitalize, yes the PP wasnt good, but he was given the op...maybe it was in part bad because KK was on it.

Maybe...I never said otherwise lol

Anyway 6.1M for that lol, not our problem anymore.

Indeed.

 

[417]

You quoted me a ton of times I still never understood what was the irony or what words exactly were supposed to come back haunting me...

You suggested in your original post that 30-40pt C can be considered a 2nd line C.

So I asked how that meshes with your opinion of 30pt 3rd line C (Kotkaniemi)...you deviated and started discussing how he got "plenty of time" on the PP.

I then proceeded to highlight how he finished 8th in avg toi/g on the PP...

You then again went onto a rant how 2 mins is enough for him to produce...but once more, I never argued how much he produced I disagreed with your take that he had "plenty of time".

being sheltered as hell getting soft minutes and consistent PP time since he's been in the league.

How is that not a good environment to progress/develop?

I thought his development was going fine...as I've told you SEVERAL times, he's been used like a 3rd/4th line C and he's produced accordingly.

While I would have liked to have seen him get more opportunities and I don't think they didn't great job in that area, I understand why they used him as they did.

But none of this is really the discussion ...it's more about how you're expectations from the player have more to do with his draft rank than how he was proportionally used.

The idea that Lehkonen and Byron are worse than the dudes he would've got as linemates in Finland is just insanity!

What are you talking about? When did I even mention Byron or Lekhonen's name? Lol.

 

[canucklover123]

In fact I haven't said a single thing about his ability to produce on the PP.


But I didn't argue that because it can't be argued...it is a fact. He was 8th in average toi per game.

You can check for yourself...whatever conclusion you gather from that is also your own.

I meannnnn... its right here lol.

You're not wrong, it was actually your only fact and then you stated, how do you expect him to produce ........... again seeing as the last 4 players are spread between 12 seconds. its a weak argument.

Not sure where you get the first line production from though

Plenty of PP time?

Firstly, the Habs PP sucked

Secondly, he was 8th amongst Habs forwards in PP TOI/g.

Why would you expect one of the least used forwards on the PP, to be productive on a bottom 1/3 PP unit???

Once more...you're expecting one of the least used forwards to put up 1st line production.

The problem wasn't Kotkaniemi...its fans who have have unfair and unrealistic expectations.

 

[417]

I meannnnn... its right here lol.

But that's HIS argument...I just highlighted his usage and asked why he expected one of the least used forwards to produce on a struggling PP.

You're not wrong, it was actually your only fact and then you stated, how do you expect him to produce ........... again seeing as the last 4 players are spread between 12 seconds. its a weak argument.[

It's not a week argument when he framed it as "plenty of time".

It was not plenty of time.

Why are we rewriting history and acting like KK was some key member of the PP? Lol it's just not true.

He wasn't very good on the PP, no one argued otherwise...it's not even the point of the discussion, it's @Belial who deviated to that because he contradicted himself.

Not sure where you get the first line production from though

Once more...perhaps you didn't follow.

But @Belial suggested a 30-40pt C is a 2nd line C (referring to Danalt one can only assume).

So I asked him why he shits on KK for being a 3rd line 30pt C....this is where he entered with his "KK got plenty of time on the PP" nonsense.

 

[417]

I mean ..how can one not spot the irony of using context and circumstances to explain the lack of production for one (Danault) while complety ignoring the context and circumstances for the other (Kotkaniemi).

And then go around accusing others of being disingenuous lol.

Irony all around today

 

[Belial]

You suggested in your original post that 30-40pt C can be considered a 2nd line C.

So I asked how that meshes with your opinion of 30pt 3rd line C (Kotkaniemi)...you deviated and started discussing how he got "plenty of time" on the PP.

I then proceeded to highlight how he finished 8th in avg toi/g on the PP...

You then again went onto a rant how 2 mins is enough for him to produce...but once more, I never argued how much he produced I disagreed with your take that he had "plenty of time".

Yes and I still stand by that point, what's wrong with that point ?

35-40 ES points with tough assignments are #2 center territory.

Getting so many points from a third line with no PP time is really tough.

But KK was not in that situation at all, he was used in a way to produce offense even if on paper he was the 3rd center.

I thought his development was going fine...as I've told you SEVERAL times, he's been used like a 3rd/4th line C and he's produced accordingly.

While I would have liked to have seen him get more opportunities and I don't think they didn't great job in that area, I understand why they used him as they did.

But none of this is really the discussion ...it's more about how you're expectations from the player have more to do with his draft rank than how he was proportionally used.

He was not used as a typical shutdown #3 center.

He was getting mainly offensive zone starts and PP time so yeah his production was not on par with his deployment.

You always asked for more responsibilities and ice time while he couldn't even deliver a decent result with the time he got.

There was no logical reason to give him more ice time.

What are you talking about? When did I even mention Byron or Lekhonen's name? Lol.

That was not particularly directed at you, it was more of a thoughts out loud situation regarding the whole development thing.

 

[canucklover123]

But that's HIS argument...I just highlighted his usage and asked why he expected one of the least used forwards to produce on a struggling PP.

It's not a week argument when he framed it as "plenty of time".

It was not plenty of time.

Why are we rewriting history and acting like KK was some key member of the PP? Lol it's just not true.

No one is rewriting history lol.... being 8th on a team with PP/TOI when the 3-4 people in front of you are less than 12 seconds apart is a weak use of a fact (your only fact). Arguing context every second post, one would assume you would use it.

Once more...perhaps you didn't follow.

But @Belial suggested a 30-40pt C is a 2nd line C (referring to Danalt one can only assume).

So I asked him why he shits on KK for being a 3rd line 30pt C....this is where he entered with his "KK got plenty of time on the PP" nonsense.

He also posted without PP time, and thats where the basis of this non sense back and fourth. Where your only fact is KK again was 8th on PP TOI/G. I did follow, please dont cut out phrases when making responses. We can always go back and see them.

 

[canucklover123]

I mean ..how can one not spot the irony of using context and circumstances to explain the lack of production for one (Danault) while complety ignoring the context and circumstances for the other (Kotkaniemi).

And then go around accusing others of being disingenuous lol.

Irony all around today

Can you elaborate. Because all I've seen you argue is the PP TOI of KK on a bad power play.
You refer to one stat and one stat only and that is him being 8th ...refusing to acknowledge that he is mere seconds behind 4 other players..

Danault doesnt play PP....

Not irony, just the refusal of using context on your part about KK.

 

[Belial]

I mean ..how can one not spot the irony of using context and circumstances to explain the lack of production for one (Danault) while complety ignoring the context and circumstances for the other (Kotkaniemi).

And then go around accusing others of being disingenuous lol.

Irony all around today

Yes, exactly how can't you see the light at the end of the tunnel is mindboggling, to say the least!

One guy gets the toughest minutes available and does a pretty decent job while the other guy gets fed soft minutes and he can't take advantage whatsoever.

Your point would've made sense if the roles were inverted and KK was still not getting more minutes than Danault.

But it's not the case so I seriously have no idea what you're trying to argue.

 

[canucklover123]

We can use defensive zone faceoffs to explaine to excuse Danault's lack of production ...

But God forbid we do the same and provide context, for others lol

Not at all arguing Danault's lack of production, the only problem with your comparison is that one Danault's defensive FO usage is not negligible, his numbers in D zone is much larger than the mean.

This is even more so in Playoffs, when his numbers took an even bigger hit offensively but his D zone usage increased exponentially.

That is hard to argue. Grasping at straws that KK has mere seconds less than 3 players on the PP is again a weak use of a stat or usage of context.

Clear difference.