Player Discussion Phillip Danault 1st line 3rd C Edition

[417]

Fascinating how much hate Danault gets around here... I wonder why?

Not sure where you got that I hate Danault or what you're trying to imply, perhaps you're suggesting I have a bias against francophones which would be quite a leap given that i'm francophone myself.

But that's neither here nor there.

I really like Danault as a player, I think he's a very good 2 way center and ideally, I'd like the Habs to find a way to keep him moving forward.

If the Habs announced they had signed Philippe Danault to a 5-6yr contract extension at 4.5-4.75M i'd be jumping for joy.

But every player has a price point and IMO, anything over 5M is a price i'd rather the Habs not pay and if I put myself in Danault's shoes, I can see why he thinks he shoudl get more. If he wants to bet on himself and go out and get a career year in points and walk in free agency and sign a big money deal next summer...more power to him.

it's just not going to be in Montreal.

Having said that, I haven't liked what has come out of Danault's mouth ever since the Habs were eliminated...I think he's talking his way out of Montreal and if that's the eventual outcome.

So be it.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Not sure where you got that I hate Danault or what you're trying to imply, perhaps you're suggesting I have a bias against francophones which would be quite a leap given that i'm francophone myself.

But that's neither here nor there.

I really like Danault as a player, I think he's a very good 2 way center and ideally, I'd like the Habs to find a way to keep him moving forward.

If the Habs announced they had signed Philippe Danault to a 5-6yr contract extension at 4.5-4.75M i'd be jumping for joy.

But every player has a price point and IMO, anything over 5M is a price i'd rather the Habs not pay and if I put myself in Danault's shoes, I can see why he thinks he shoudl get more. If he wants to bet on himself and go out and get a career year in points and walk in free agency and sign a big money deal next summer...more power to him.

it's just not going to be in Montreal.

Having said that, I haven't liked what has come out of Danault's mouth ever since the Habs were eliminated...I think he's talking his way out of Montreal and if that's the eventual outcome.

So be it.

Sign Danault after the season and before free agency. 3 or 4 years at $5.5M. I'm pretty sure he is after Gallagher type contract and we can't go that high so reduce the term and AAV comes down. I'd even be happy if it was 2 years at $5M. We have guys like Evans and Poehling who need more time and 2+ years, we will have a better center depth picture

- Suzuki is 21 this season and 23 in two more years
- Kotkaniemi is 20 this season and 22 in two more years
- Evans is 24 this next season and 26 in two more years.
- Poehling is 21 this next season and 23 in two more years.

It's too early to just let Danault walk. But we can get a better feel after this next season. Maybe that is Bergevin's plan cause Danault is asking for too much AAV and Term. I don't believe we can afford to give him a 6-8 year deal at $6.5M. So if I was GM, I'd offer a 2-4 year term with $5M - $5.5M of AAV. If he says no, I say we will have to wait and see how next season goes and what our cap space looks like for next season. If he gets offended, that's beyond our control. It's a business. We all value Danault but he is not a legit $6M+ center... especially in the flat cap seasons

The best strategy on Danault is term... Find term that overlaps Suzuki and KK's ELC/Bridge years. I think that term is around 2-4 years. Anything over 4 years in term could be a big problem cause that's probably when we have to pay Suzuki and Kotkaniemi for their prime years.

 

[417]

Sign Danault after the season and before free agency. 3 or 4 years at $5.5M. I'm pretty sure he is after Gallagher type contract and we can't go that high so reduce the term and AAV comes down. I'd even be happy if it was 2 years at $5M. We have guys like Evans and Poehling who need more time and 2+ years, we will have a better center depth picture

- Suzuki is 21 this season and 23 in two more years
- Kotkaniemi is 20 this season and 22 in two more years
- Evans is 24 this next season and 26 in two more years.
- Poehling is 21 this next season and 23 in two more years.

It's too early to just let Danault walk. But we can get a better feel after this next season. Maybe that is Bergevin's plan cause Danault is asking for too much AAV and Term. I don't believe we can afford to give him a 6-8 year deal at $6.5M. So if I was GM, I'd offer a 2-4 year term with $5M - $5.5M of AAV. If he says no, I say we will have to wait and see how next season goes and what our cap space looks like for next season. If he gets offended, that's beyond our control. It's a business. We all value Danault but he is not a legit $6M+ center... especially in the flat cap seasons

The best strategy on Danault is term... Find term that overlaps Suzuki and KK's ELC/Bridge years. I think that term is around 2-4 years. Anything over 4 years in term could be a big problem cause that's probably when we have to pay Suzuki and Kotkaniemi for their prime years.

Good post...

Again, ideally the Habs can find a way to fit Danault into their salary structure moving forward. But that's the key part for me, moving forward.

I don't think it would be prudent for the Habs to pay Danault for what he represented the last few years, his next contract (assuming it's with the Habs) has to reflect his value and role on the team in 21-22 and beyond.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Good post...

Again, ideally the Habs can find a way to fit Danault into their salary structure moving forward. But that's the key part for me, moving forward.

I don't think it would be prudent for the Habs to pay Danault for what he represented the last few years, his next contract (assuming it's with the Habs) has to reflect his value and role on the team in 21-22 and beyond.

We agree. I think Bergevin is on the same page as well. Like I said, term is the key in the overall strategy. Give him term that overlaps the ELC/Bridge years of Suzuki and Kotkaniemi. That's 2-4 years and it also reduces the AAV. If Danault don't budge, I doubt any other team wants to pay him more than the Habs in both AAV and term.

Bergevin has to manage that better than Radulov. Don't get into a controversial contract debate where frustrations come out. My gut tells me they both agreed to play out the season and circle back. If Danault thinks he is that good... prove us wrong. Go out and produce 60-80 pts. Force our hand if he thinks his prime years are worth $6.5M+

Bergevin and Danault could be both trolling us... Might have a handshake agreement to sign after the expansion draft . Remember people talking about that with either of Gallagher or Petry before they signed in terms of protection strategy for the draft? Well, if that is in play, one of the guys will have to play along. It might be Danault. Dreaming here bud

All I know is it's too early to let Danault walk. Both Suzuki and Kotkaniemi would have to take massive steps forward this next season and it's deeper than just points.

 

[RC51]

habs now have 3 good top lines, each center now has good wingers, lets see which line proves to be 1st and 2dn and then 3rd. if danault proves to be a great but 3rd line center, then nobody pays 6.5-7 mil to a 3rd center and thats it, its sign or sell time

 

[Habs Halifax]

habs now have 3 good top lines, each center now has good wingers, lets see which line proves to be 1st and 2dn and then 3rd. if danault proves to be a great but 3rd line center, then nobody pays 6.5-7 mil to a 3rd center and thats it, its sign or sell time

He is the challenge though... Nobody knows who is the 1C, 2C, or 3C and the Habs like to roll lines. Not many are considering that one game, Danault might be our 1C and in another game, he is used as a 3C.

Danault is in his prime while Suzuki and Kotkaniemi are learning on the job still. I think our fan base is guilty of penciling in Suzuki and KK ahead of Danault too early when they are 20 and 21.

Next 2-4 years: Habs pay our top 3 centers what? Remember, Suzuki and KK will be on ELC and Bridge years

Next 5-10 years: In the 5+ point, that's likely when we have to pay Suzuki and KK for their prime years. So with me... the proper term for Danault is 2-4 years.

 

[417]

We agree. I think Bergevin is on the same page as well. Like I said, term is the key in the overall strategy. Give him term that overlaps the ELC/Bridge years of Suzuki and Kotkaniemi. That's 2-4 years and it also reduces the AAV. If Danault don't budge, I doubt any other team wants to pay him more than the Habs in both AAV and term.

Bergevin has to manage that better than Radulov. Don't get into a controversial contract debate where frustrations come out. My gut tells me they both agreed to play out the season and circle back. If Danault thinks he is that good... prove us wrong. Go out and produce 60-80 pts. Force our hand if he thinks his prime years are worth $6.5M+

Bergevin and Danault could be both trolling us... Might have a handshake agreement to sign after the expansion draft . Remember people talking about that with either of Gallagher or Petry before they signed in terms of protection strategy for the draft? Well, if that is in play, one of the guys will have to play along. It might be Danault. Dreaming here bud

I personally wouldn't be upset if he plays out the season, the Habs make a deep run and he walks in the offseason. All depends on how the season unfolds.

If the Habs make a deep run and Suzuki/Kotkaniemi kind of relegate Danault to a more traditional 3rd line role, kinda like he had for the playoffs this year.

Then I can accept him walking as a UFA...chalk it up to the price to be paid for Suzuki/Kotkaniemi to take a leap forward.

All I know is it's too early to let Danault walk. Both Suzuki and Kotkaniemi would have to take massive steps forward this next season and it's deeper than just points.

It'll be difficult for one, never mind both, to take a massive leap forward as long as Danault is on the roster and his usage continues the way it has.

It would take a complete change in philosophy from CJ and I think that's highly unlikely.

 

[LaP]

He is the challenge though... Nobody knows who is the 1C, 2C, or 3C and the Habs like to roll lines. Not many are considering that one game, Danault might be our 1C and in another game, he is used as a 3C.

Danault is in his prime while Suzuki and Kotkaniemi are learning on the job still. I think our fan base is guilty of penciling in Suzuki and KK ahead of Danault too early when they are 20 and 21.

Next 2-4 years: Habs pay our top 3 centers what? Remember, Suzuki and KK will be on ELC and Bridge years

Next 5-10 years: In the 5+ point, that's likely when we have to pay Suzuki and KK for their prime years. So with me... the proper term for Danault is 2-4 years.

That's true of most teams out there. Good coaches wont overplay a guy having a bad game. There's absolutely no problem with a 3rd line center playing more than a 1st or 2nd line center a given game if there's lot of pk, the top 6 is having a terrible game and/or if you take a huge lead early on. But that should just be a game here and there on average the 3rd line center should play less and with lesser quality wingers. Your 1st line players don't need to all play on the same line at 5v5 too. It's perfectly fine to spread your talent across your first two lines.

The problem with not having 3 clearly established 1st line quality players playing lot of minutes on average is when you're trailing by one goal in playoffs. Remember what happened the year Radulov was here? At the end of the games in playoffs when we needed a goal CJ was sending AG on the ice instead of Danault. This was a big problem cause AG was on the ice with wingers he was not used to play with and while being somewhat rusted from not playing much (he was on the 4th line at 5v5). You 100% want to have your leaders on the ice at the end of a game you're trailing by 1 goal in playoffs and you absolutely want those leaders to play lot on average on a top 6.

Danault not being able to deliver offense when we need it the most is surely a problem when he's used with the best wingers between 17 and 19 minutes a game on average. People keep talking about Boston and LA spreading their talents but the 3 years Boston went to the scf Bergeron and Krejci were both clear as day top 6 players. No other center were close in term of TOI and both of them did the job offensively. Bergeron average 65 points over 82 games in Career and Krejci 62. Same for LA. Top 6 centers were clearly identified and players able to produce. I don't remember if Carter was a center for their 1st cup i think he was on the wing (right) and Richards was playing center? Anyway Kopitar average 72 points over 82 games in career, Carter 58 and Richards 53 (mostly due to a terrible end of career in his prime he was a ~60 points player). You could make a solid case for Chicago's 2nd line center not being one during their cups but they had Kane on the 2nd line one of the best winger in the history of the league and a easy lock for the HOF.

Danault average 42 points every 82 games in career. Now you cloud argue it's because he started his career slowly. So let's ignore his first few seasons and consider only the time he's been a "number 1" with us. Over the last 4 seasons he average 47 points every 82 games which is significantly under any top 6 centers Boston and LA had if you exclude Richards snow white end of career (two of the teams PD defenders always bring on to justify his TOI). During that period Danault played on average 17:12 minutes and was clear as day one our of top 6 centers.

I don't understand how anyone could see that as not being a problem. Moving forward on average he needs to play less and be out of the top 6. Doesn't mean he wont play more here and there when the situation justify it. But his offense simply is not good enough to play as much as he did the last 4 seasons. So personally i would not go higher than 4-4.5 for a long term deal and not more than 5-5.5 on a short term deal finishing about at the same time as NS's and JK's ELC. Over that would be ridiculous imo. We must bet on Suzuki and Kotkaniemi and as early as this year. We don't have 10 more years of Price and Weber and i would give both kids the chance to play more and with better wingers as early as this season.

 

[Runner77]

Not sure where you got that I hate Danault or what you're trying to imply, perhaps you're suggesting I have a bias against francophones which would be quite a leap given that i'm francophone myself.

But that's neither here nor there.

I really like Danault as a player, I think he's a very good 2 way center and ideally, I'd like the Habs to find a way to keep him moving forward.

If the Habs announced they had signed Philippe Danault to a 5-6yr contract extension at 4.5-4.75M i'd be jumping for joy.

But every player has a price point and IMO, anything over 5M is a price i'd rather the Habs not pay and if I put myself in Danault's shoes, I can see why he thinks he shoudl get more. If he wants to bet on himself and go out and get a career year in points and walk in free agency and sign a big money deal next summer...more power to him.

it's just not going to be in Montreal.

Having said that, I haven't liked what has come out of Danault's mouth ever since the Habs were eliminated...I think he's talking his way out of Montreal and if that's the eventual outcome.

So be it.

Every time someone brings up facts on this forum and they happen to be adverse to a player, almost automatically someone comes out guns ablazing about "hate" being involved.

I'm in the same boat as you are. It's not about Danault personally, it's what his ask is for a new contract and the role he expects to play. His comments evoke that he's not interested in filling a 3rd line center role and he's expecting a big payday, not to mention having made a demand to play with the team's better offensive players.

If he can't be reeled back into reality or into the type of role he's best suited for, then he's no longer a fit for the team. That's not "hate", it's simple deductive logic and taking a reasonable approach based on the facts at hand.

 

[Habs Halifax]

That's true of most teams out there. Good coaches wont overplay a guy having a bad game. There's absolutely no problem with a 3rd line center playing more than a 1st or 2nd line center a given game if there's lot of pk, the top 6 is having a terrible game and/or if you take a huge lead early on. But that should just be a game here and there on average the 3rd line center should play less and with lesser quality wingers. Your 1st line players don't need to all play on the same line at 5v5 too. It's perfectly fine to spread your talent across your first two lines.

The problem with not having 3 clearly established 1st line quality players playing lot of minutes on average is when you're trailing by one goal in playoffs. Remember what happened the year Radulov was here? At the end of the games in playoffs when we needed a goal CJ was sending AG on the ice instead of Danault. This was a big problem cause AG was on the ice with wingers he was not used to play with and while being somewhat rusted from not playing much (he was on the 4th line at 5v5). You 100% want to have your leaders on the ice at the end of a game you're trailing by 1 goal in playoffs and you absolutely want those leaders to play lot on average on a top 6.

Danault not being able to deliver offense when we need it the most is surely a problem when he's used with the best wingers between 17 and 19 minutes a game on average. People keep talking about Boston and LA spreading their talents but the 3 years Boston went to the scf Bergeron and Krejci were both clear as day top 6 players. No other center were close in term of TOI and both of them did the job offensively. Bergeron average 65 points over 82 games in Career and Krejci 62. Same for LA. Top 6 centers were clearly identified and players able to produce. I don't remember if Carter was a center for their 1st cup i think he was on the wing (right) and Richards was playing center? Anyway Kopitar average 72 points over 82 games in career, Carter 58 and Richards 53 (mostly due to a terrible end of career in his prime he was a ~60 points player). You could make a solid case for Chicago's 2nd line center not being one during their cups but they had Kane on the 2nd line one of the best winger in the history of the league and a easy lock for the HOF.

Danault average 42 points every 82 games in career. Now you cloud argue it's because he started his career slowly. So let's ignore his first few seasons and consider only the time he's been a "number 1" with us. Over the last 4 seasons he average 47 points every 82 games which is significantly under any top 6 centers Boston and LA had if you exclude Richards snow white end of career (two of the teams PD defenders always bring on to justify his TOI). During that period Danault played on average 17:12 minutes and was clear as day one our of top 6 centers.

I don't understand how anyone could see that as not being a problem. Moving forward on average he needs to play less and be out of the top 6. Doesn't mean he wont play more here and there when the situation justify it. But his offense simply is not good enough to play as much as he did the last 4 seasons. So personally i would not go higher than 4-4.5 for a long term deal and not more than 5-5.5 on a short term deal finishing about at the same time as NS's and JK's ELC. Over that would be ridiculous imo. We must bet on Suzuki and Kotkaniemi and as early as this year. We don't have 10 more years of Price and Weber and i would give both kids the chance to play more and with better wingers as early as this season.

I think we need to come to grips that the Habs don't have a top line. And rolling three 2nd lines is an advantage, not a disadvantage. The growth of Suzuki and KK means Danault does not get any PP time. I don't see any problems other than signing Danault to 5+ years in term. That's a cap space issue more than anything.

I've called this many months ago. Keep Danault with Gallagher and Tatar and find better wingers for Suzuki and Kotkaniemi. We have done that so I think many Habs fans who are on the negative side of things are in for a surprise! And when I look at what we have on paper today, I have my mind on term with Danault. 2-4 years in term fits the ELC/Bridge years with Suzuki and KK. I see positive situation there, not negative. But like I said, if you sign Danault to 5+ years, that overlaps things too much where it complicates potential contracts where we have to pay Kotkaniemi and Suuzki for prime years

 

[CoupeStanley]

This strong centerline position we've built over the past few years will collapse pretty hard if Danault, one of the premier 5 on 5 two way guy in the league, leave and we're left with sending Suzuki and KK against other teams top line instead of sending them to abuse other teams 2nd and 3rd line.

Getting a replacement on the market will likely not be much cheaper and probably not as good a fit.

 

[Habs Halifax]

This strong centerline position we've built over the past few years will collapse pretty hard if Danault, one of the premier 5 on 5 two way guy in the league, leave and we're left with sending Suzuki and KK against other teams top line instead of sending them to abuse other teams 2nd and 3rd line.

Getting a replacement on the market will likely not be much cheaper and probably not as good a fit.

100%! I think some of our fan base is too guilty of trying to create room for Suzuki and KK who are 20 and 21 heading into next season and throwing Danault under the rug. You hit the nail right on the head... if Suzuki and KK are the top 2C's going up against other teams top centers and we have a guy at 3C who is not as effective as Danault in the 200' game, the results are different and those same fans who want to get rid of Danault cause they don't want to pay him $5M -$6M range, will cry when he is gone.

It's not complicated. Pay Danault for another 2-4 years while Suzuki and KK are on ELC/Bridge deals. Cap won't be a problem if you limit Danault's term to fit the development of Suzuki and KK for when you pay them for their prime years. That to me is another 2-4 years.

I was bang on with Petry's 4 year term and off by $250k. I'm calling a Danault extension to be around 2-4 years at around $5M - $5.5M range. I'd be totally fine with either a 2x $5M or 4x $5.5M

 

[26Mats]

This strong centerline position we've built over the past few years will collapse pretty hard if Danault, one of the premier 5 on 5 two way guy in the league, leave and we're left with sending Suzuki and KK against other teams top line instead of sending them to abuse other teams 2nd and 3rd line.

Getting a replacement on the market will likely not be much cheaper and probably not as good a fit.

So what contract is Danault worth?

I say 5M AAV on a 2 to 4 year deal.

 

[Habs Halifax]

So what contract is Danault worth?

I say 5M AAV on a 2 to 4 year deal.

2x $5M (Flat cap years)
or
3x $5.25M
or
4x $5.5M

The minute you go beyond 4 years, he starts to ask for a Gallagher type contract and it also might complicate prime year contracts for Suzuki and KK. 2 years might be ideal... takes him to be a UFA at the age of 29/30 with a higher salary cap

 

[Habs Halifax]

Danault has to be more careful vs the Habs IMO. If Suzuki and KK take more steps forward next year, Danault's numbers will be affected and therefore the book is out as he heads into UFA. Add that Covid might hurt the NHL's revenue even more next season and that might put a restriction on Danault's value as a UFA. Call it a double whammy working against Danault.

This is not about devaluing Danault. This is about a flat cap and the Habs wanting Danault to play a role. The same role other teams will try to use him on if he elects to go to UFA. Habs are not out of place wanting to pay him between Pageau and Nelson types.... guys who signed contracts recently who are close to Danault.

 

[admiralcadillac]

We won’t be able to afford a 5m dollar third line center for very long. I’d honestly see how the season plays out before offering him that kind of money.

 

[417]

This strong centerline position we've built over the past few years will collapse pretty hard if Danault, one of the premier 5 on 5 two way guy in the league, leave and we're left with sending Suzuki and KK against other teams top line instead of sending them to abuse other teams 2nd and 3rd line.

Getting a replacement on the market will likely not be much cheaper and probably not as good a fit.

That's the NHL under a cap system...you can't have it all.

But I think you're not taking into consideration the growth that Suzuki/Kotkaniemi could have between now and then.

Look at their age, do you think Danault at the same age was the 2 way dynamo he is now?

 

[Habs Halifax]

We won’t be able to afford a 5m dollar third line center for very long. I’d honestly see how the season plays out before offering him that kind of money.

If the Islanders can afford a $5M center who is listed "3rd", so can the Habs. You hit the key part... for a very long time. The key is timing on Danault's term and when we have to pay Suzuki and KK for their prime years ... AFTER their next bridge deals.

Sergachev was just signed for 3 years at $4.8M. Suzuki and KK will be bridged or signed long term like Patch and Gallagher were. Sign Danault for 2-4 years and we don't have problems. We actually have an advantage of rolling 3 good centers for a change.

 

[Habs Halifax]

That's the NHL under a cap system...you can't have it all.

But I think you're not taking into consideration the growth that Suzuki/Kotkaniemi could have between now and then.

Look at their age, do you think Danault at the same age was the 2 way dynamo he is now?

If Point, Laine, M Tkachuk, Sergachev, McAvoy can be bridged for 2 or 3 years, so will Suzuki and KK. Broken record... 2-4 years in term for Danault fits!

If either of Suzuki or KK get a long term deal after their ELC... they will come in at a decent AAV... like Patch, Price, and Gallagher.

 

[OldCraig71]

Every time someone brings up facts on this forum and they happen to be adverse to a player, almost automatically someone comes out guns ablazing about "hate" being involved.

I'm in the same boat as you are. It's not about Danault personally, it's what his ask is for a new contract and the role he expects to play. His comments evoke that he's not interested in filling a 3rd line center role and he's expecting a big payday, not to mention having made a demand to play with the team's better offensive players.

If he can't be reeled back into reality or into the type of role he's best suited for, then he's no longer a fit for the team. That's not "hate", it's simple deductive logic and taking a reasonable approach based on the facts at hand.

 

[Wats]

I'd give Danault anything up to 6M, even if he ends up 3rd C he is young and can bring long term depth/strength to the overall lineup playing tougher minutes. Feel like he alone can carry a line and make it effective 5 on 5 (ie give him 2 defensively sound cheap 4th liners and the line will be effective). He's the type of player I think will be more successful with term, doesn't have to worry about his offensive stats and focus on shut down role.

Guys like Byron/Shaw/Prust and perhaps soon to be Lehkonen on the other hand, I'd be more strict with cap wise. Feel like their impact can be much more easily replaced from UFA/within cheaply.

Armia I'm torn, he is a rare package of size/skill/skating with defensive skill and willingness to be physical. Wouldn't mind paying him either. Feel like he's got upside and will be awesome to get him at under 4M.

2021/22:

Drouin - Suzuki - Anderson
Toffoli - Kotkaniemi - Gallagher
LW - Danault - Armia
LW - Evans - RW

Hopefully Toffoli ends up being good LW and rest of the lineup filled out with ~1M players. Byron/Lehkonen making 6+M aren't nearly as valuable as Danault+Poehling (whatever cheap player). Almost a foregone conclusion Tatar cannot be retained so hopefully Suzuki/Drouin/KK/Anderson develop well enough to make his loss unnoticeable.

 

[Kudo Shinichi]

I see us re-signing Danault even if its for more money than we want to give, and then trading him in a couple of years once Poehling is ready for a top 9 center role.

We have no choice but to re-sign him since he is ufa next summer, and we dont want to lose him for nothing.

 

[Runner77]

We won’t be able to afford a 5m dollar third line center for very long. I’d honestly see how the season plays out before offering him that kind of money.

Something's gotta give.

If we want to pay $15 M for goalies, then we probably shouldn't be paying $5M plus for a third line center. Or have a $3.4M right winger playing on a 4th line. And so on.

 

[Runner77]

I'm not sure that getting applauded by the Joker is necessarily a good thing.

Bottom line is, there is a good reason that Danault is not getting Bergevin's attention right now. Only has to look in the mirror and STFU.

 

[admiralcadillac]

To be fair Craig, you have levelled some pretty heavy criticism at a player who doesn’t deserve it.