Player Discussion Phillip Danault 1st line 3rd C Edition

[Aces on the road]

I don't know if that's really Danault's problem, Tatar seemed invisible, Gally had a ton of chances maybe a bit unlucky.

And that line was drowned in the defensive zone, it's like the coaching staff didn't even expect production out of them...

Offensive zone start %:

Kotka 69.05%
Evans 66.67%
Suzy 61.70%
Danault 32.14%!

People talking about Danault as an easily replaceable guy are gonna get a rude awakening if he's not resigned.

He and his line are doing an amazing job considering the usage they get.

Kotkaniemi would get embarrassed as we speak if he was used in that role.

They have to keep Danault around till KK and Suzuki are still developing.

This is so true. He is poor mans Bergeron

 

[Aces on the road]

4 mil, no more

Comparing to Gallagher Danault should get 10 million

 

[Leon Lucius Black]

If we want Suzuki and Kotkaniemi to develop better offensively then we need to keep Danault around. Danault and whoever he plays with can match up against other team's top lines allowing Suzuki and Kotkaniemi to play more offensively. In addition for both Suzuki and Kotkaniemi there isn't a huge sample size and if they take a step back we would be ****ed without Danault.

When Danault signs as a UFA he will be only 28 years old, if you give him $5-5.5M and say a guy like Poehling steps up in the next 2 years then you could easily trade Danault.

 

[26Mats]

If we want Suzuki and Kotkaniemi to develop better offensively then we need to keep Danault around. Danault and whoever he plays with can match up against other team's top lines allowing Suzuki and Kotkaniemi to play more offensively. In addition for both Suzuki and Kotkaniemi there isn't a huge sample size and if they take a step back we would be ****ed without Danault.

When Danault signs as a UFA he will be only 28 years old, if you give him $5-5.5M and say a guy like Poehling steps up in the next 2 years then you could easily trade Danault.

I don't see Poehling as a C at the NHL level.

I see kk-Suzuki-Danault for years to come.

MB will keep Danault. His numbers this year will determine the value of his contract. If his numbers are big, he'll get a big contract. If they're mediocre, he'll still get a decently big contract because he'll be a looming UFA and MB won't want to lose him.

 

[SlafCaufield]

I know people wont like it but if Danault isnt going to sign at a reasonable amount for a 3C, we should cash in on him now, we could get a ton for him in trades

 

[HabsDood]

Quick trivia because people here tend to think ''yeah because he has a french name'':

1-How many francos did we had on the team in 1993 including black aces, our last cup atm..? And the cup before? And the other? Anybody? That's the Habs.

2-How many do we have now? Last year? The year before? ect. Now we're just a team in this league..

Danault will help for a long time and it would be a great mistake to trade him...

 

[Kriss E]

Quick trivia because people here tend to think ''yeah because he has a french name'':

1-How many francos did we had on the team in 1993 including black aces, our last cup atm..? And the cup before? And the other? Anybody? That's the Habs.

2-How many do we have now? Last year? The year before? ect. Now we're just a team in this league..

Danault will help for a long time and it would be a great mistake to trade him...

I mean...how do you ask these questions without looking at the evolution of the league?
There was 24 teams in the NHL in 1993, you do realize that right? In 86, 21 teams. You wanna keep going?
Once upon a time, Montreal also had dibs on Qc prospects.

What a silly post, to put it lightly.

 

[overlords]

Once upon a time, Montreal also had dibs on Qc prospects.

That's 3 points off your Habs fan license, sir.

 

[HabsDood]

I mean...how do you ask these questions without looking at the evolution of the league?
There was 24 teams in the NHL in 1993, you do realize that right? In 86, 21 teams. You wanna keep going?
Once upon a time, Montreal also had dibs on Qc prospects.

What a silly post, to put it lightly.

A bit rude.. Well, see next post I guess, and that Qc Habs pick priority is bullshit.. I just asked 2 questions, why don't you answer them?..

 

[Kriss E]

That's 3 points off your Habs fan license, sir.

I might have oversold it, but it did happen. In 1936, Habs almost declared bankruptcy due to depression, and to help them, they gave Mtl dibs for two prospects from Qc.

In any event, point is, things have changed. Europeans were a lot less prevalent, not to mention Russians. League was smaller, less competition in lower leagues, less scouts and travels, teams had an advantage in watching local talent, etc.

 

[Kriss E]

A bit rude.. Well, see next post I guess, and that Qc Habs pick priority is bullshit.. I just asked 2 questions, why don't you answer them?..

Because it's leading. In court that would be an easy objection that would be sustained by the judge.

You purposely constructed them in a way that it'll lead towards the answer you want.

 

[HabsDood]

Because it's leading. In court that would be an easy objection that would be sustained by the judge.

You purposely constructed them in a way that it'll lead towards the answer you want.

lol funny, what I posted are facts, have a look.

 

[Kriss E]

lol funny, what I posted are facts, have a look.

Facts are just facts, how you present them is what makes it ''leading''.

 

[HabsDood]

Facts are just facts, how you present them is what makes it ''leading''.

I rest my case Kriss

 

[HabsWhiteKnightLOL]

Why do we still have Phillip Danault and the number 1 in the same sentence one month before 2021.

 

[Kriss E]

I rest my case Kriss

I'd fold a losing hand as well.

 

[HabsDood]

I'd fold a losing hand as well.

You do that, mate, checkmate

With all due respect. C ya.

 

[Aces on the road]

Montreal did couple of huge mistakes. Too expensive contracts to Anderson and Gallagher. Assuming they did because counting on Kotka and Suzuki to 1st line center spot. It wont happen in contender team. Because of these two reasons they do not have afford on Danault and also on Armia. Assuming both are gone. That makes team significantly weaker.

 

[BLONG7]

Quick trivia because people here tend to think ''yeah because he has a french name'':

1-How many francos did we had on the team in 1993 including black aces, our last cup atm..? And the cup before? And the other? Anybody? That's the Habs.

2-How many do we have now? Last year? The year before? ect. Now we're just a team in this league..

Danault will help for a long time and it would be a great mistake to trade him...

What is this?? How does Danault the perfect 3rd line centre on a good team, have anything to do with what you posted?

 

[417]

If we want Suzuki and Kotkaniemi to develop better offensively then we need to keep Danault around. Danault and whoever he plays with can match up against other team's top lines allowing Suzuki and Kotkaniemi to play more offensively. In addition for both Suzuki and Kotkaniemi there isn't a huge sample size and if they take a step back we would be ****ed without Danault.

When Danault signs as a UFA he will be only 28 years old, if you give him $5-5.5M and say a guy like Poehling steps up in the next 2 years then you could easily trade Danault.

The thing is...especially if you look around the league.

The best players, play against the best players.

If we want Suzuki and Kotkaniemi to continue to develop, then they need to be exposed to playing against top lines. That's got to be part of their makeup and when the Habs are the one's dictating these matchups, rather then the opposite...

Then we'll know Suzuki and Kotkaniemi have arrived.

But if we're going to keep Danault and continue using him as we have, then don't expect Suzuki & Kotkaniemi to take big steps forward.

 

[Leon Lucius Black]

The thing is...especially if you look around the league.

The best players, play against the best players.

If we want Suzuki and Kotkaniemi to continue to develop, then they need to be exposed to playing against top lines. That's got to be part of their makeup and when the Habs are the one's dictating these matchups, rather then the opposite...

Then we'll know Suzuki and Kotkaniemi have arrived.

But if we're going to keep Danault and continue using him as we have, then don't expect Suzuki & Kotkaniemi to take big steps forward.

Suzuki and Kotkaniemi aren't sure fire offensive prospects such as players like an Eichel or Matthews, Suzuki can take a step back from last year and Kotkaniemi looked lost most of last year and despite looking better in the playoffs he only put up 4 points in 10 games. If they had a bigger sample size of playing well in the NHL then it would be time to take the training wheels off, but given how awful we have been at developing offensive centres I think they should be relied on more to improve offensively as they are both solid enough in their own end.

It wouldn't be like in the past where Julien relies on Nate Thompson playing 13 minutes a game to help defensively, Suzuki and KK would still get some tough matchups but would also get to focus on being point producers at ES and on the PP while Danault would be playing vs. the other top lines and playing big minutes on the PK.

 

[417]

Suzuki and Kotkaniemi aren't sure fire offensive prospects such as players like an Eichel or Matthews, Suzuki can take a step back from last year and Kotkaniemi looked lost most of last year and despite looking better in the playoffs he only put up 4 points in 10 games.

Neither were Brady Tkachuk or William Nylander or Matthew Barzal or Aleksandr Barkov or P-L Dubois, etc, sure fire offensive prospects like Eichel or Matthews?

Did that prevent their teams from thrusting them into important roles?

If we're going to wait to get Austin Matthews-level prospect assurety before playing our prospects in prominent roles, then we'll wait forever.

If they had a bigger sample size of playing well in the NHL then it would be time to take the training wheels off, but given how awful we have been at developing offensive centres I think they should be relied on more to improve offensively as they are both solid enough in their own end.

Maybe we leave the training wheels on too long?

It wouldn't be like in the past where Julien relies on Nate Thompson playing 13 minutes a game to help defensively, Suzuki and KK would still get some tough matchups but would also get to focus on being point producers at ES and on the PP while Danault would be playing vs. the other top lines and playing big minutes on the PK.

Sure...that's fine, the Habs have the luxury of being able to use Danault as a "safety blanket" for another year behind Suzuki and Kotkaniemi.

But the distribution of icetime and responsibilities, needs to start shifting towards giving #14 & #15 more responsibility.

I'm not suggesting right off the bat to play them 20 mins against top lines...but it's time to start to expose them situationally and not just letting Danault soak up all of these important developmental opportunities.

Look what these opportunities did for a player of Philippe Danault's ability?

4yrs ago, he had 51 games played in the NHL and 10pts...but the Habs put him between Pacioretty & Radulov out of necessity and he never looked back.

Imagine what that type of faith/opportunity could do for #14 & #15.

 

[Scriptor]

Montreal did couple of huge mistakes. Too expensive contracts to Anderson and Gallagher. Assuming they did because counting on Kotka and Suzuki to 1st line center spot. It wont happen in contender team. Because of these two reasons they do not have afford on Danault and also on Armia. Assuming both are gone. That makes team significantly weaker.

Things aren't as bad as you make them seem to be, unless Danault wants 6M or more. At a Pageau-like 5M, keeping Danault, Tatar and Armia is actually feasible. Danault and Tatar rather easily and Armia if they can unload both Byron and Kulak.

Next season, the Habs are saving 2M off the buyout cost this year for Alzner. They are also saving 1.475M off the Allen price tag with his new contract (assuming it's not even more by him not being picked up at the expansion draft -- it could be 3.55M for at least one season if we move towards Primeau instead as a backup for Price). If Montreal manages to pawn off Byron to the Kracken (add a 2nd round pick and a 3rd round pick), it's another 3.4M. If Montreal finds a take for Kulak and replaces him with an 8th D at around 750K, it's another 1.05M. Replacing Weal and his 1.4M with a 750K 13th forward is an extra 650K.

How far towards keeping everyone does 8.575M get you?

Need to re-up Tatar from the current 4.8M that Montreal is on the hook for.
Need to re-up Danault from the 3.083M that Montreal is currently on the hook for.
Need to re-up Armia as an UFA from the 2.6M that Montreal is currently on the hook for.
Need to re-up Lehkonen from the 2.4M that Montreal is currently on the hook for.
Need to re-up Kotkaniemi on a bridge deal up from the .925M that Montreal is currently on the hook for without bonuses.
Need to factor in the 2,75M more for Gallagher.
Need to factor in the .75M more for Petry.


8.575M - 3.5M for Gallagher and Petry raises already signed.

5.375M left over.

2.5M more for Danault, if he agrees to 5.5M

2.875M left over.

700K for Tatar, if he agrees to 5.5M

2.175M left over

900K if Armia agrees to 3.5M

1.275M left over.

350K if Lehkonen is bridged at 2.75M for a couple of years.

925K left over.

330K left over with a 22-man roster, 925 K already earned by KK and the 925K left over comes out to 2.188M, which is obviously not enough for a Kotkaniemi bridge deal. A 21-man roster would only take care of the IR needed for short term injuries.

IMO, we have to forget about Allen next year and use the extra savings for the KK bridge and that would enable us to keep most players we currently have that have any value. Switching Primeau in for Allen would free up an extra 2.075M and enable MON to bridge KK around 4M.

 

[ECWHSWI]

Things aren't as bad as you make them seem to be, unless Danault wants 6M or more. At a Pageau-like 5M, keeping Danault, Tatar and Armia is actually feasible. Danault and Tatar rather easily and Armia if they can unload both Byron and Kulak.

Next season, the Habs are saving 2M off the buyout cost this year for Alzner. They are also saving 1.475M off the Allen price tag with his new contract (assuming it's not even more by him not being picked up at the expansion draft -- it could be 3.55M for at least one season if we move towards Primeau instead as a backup for Price). If Montreal manages to pawn off Byron to the Kracken (add a 2nd round pick and a 3rd round pick), it's another 3.4M. If Montreal finds a take for Kulak and replaces him with an 8th D at around 750K, it's another 1.05M. Replacing Weal and his 1.4M with a 750K 13th forward is an extra 650K.

How far towards keeping everyone does 8.575M get you?

Need to re-up Tatar from the current 4.8M that Montreal is on the hook for.
Need to re-up Danault from the 3.083M that Montreal is currently on the hook for.
Need to re-up Armia as an UFA from the 2.6M that Montreal is currently on the hook for.
Need to re-up Lehkonen from the 2.4M that Montreal is currently on the hook for.
Need to re-up Kotkaniemi on a bridge deal up from the .925M that Montreal is currently on the hook for without bonuses.
Need to factor in the 2,75M more for Gallagher.
Need to factor in the .75M more for Petry.


8.575M - 3.5M for Gallagher and Petry raises already signed.

5.375M left over.

2.5M more for Danault, if he agrees to 5.5M

2.875M left over.

700K for Tatar, if he agrees to 5.5M

2.175M left over

900K if Armia agrees to 3.5M

1.275M left over.

350K if Lehkonen is bridged at 2.75M for a couple of years.

925K left over.

330K left over with a 22-man roster, 925 K already earned by KK and the 925K left over comes out to 2.188M, which is obviously not enough for a Kotkaniemi bridge deal. A 21-man roster would only take care of the IR needed for short term injuries.

IMO, we have to forget about Allen next year and use the extra savings for the KK bridge and that would enable us to keep most players we currently have that have any value. Switching Primeau in for Allen would free up an extra 2.075M and enable MON to bridge KK around 4M.

Allen just got extended by the Habs, and he wont be taken in expansion as there's always a decent amount of NHL calibre goalies on the UFA market.

 

[Vachon23]

Things aren't as bad as you make them seem to be, unless Danault wants 6M or more. At a Pageau-like 5M, keeping Danault, Tatar and Armia is actually feasible. Danault and Tatar rather easily and Armia if they can unload both Byron and Kulak.

Next season, the Habs are saving 2M off the buyout cost this year for Alzner. They are also saving 1.475M off the Allen price tag with his new contract (assuming it's not even more by him not being picked up at the expansion draft -- it could be 3.55M for at least one season if we move towards Primeau instead as a backup for Price). If Montreal manages to pawn off Byron to the Kracken (add a 2nd round pick and a 3rd round pick), it's another 3.4M. If Montreal finds a take for Kulak and replaces him with an 8th D at around 750K, it's another 1.05M. Replacing Weal and his 1.4M with a 750K 13th forward is an extra 650K.

How far towards keeping everyone does 8.575M get you?

Need to re-up Tatar from the current 4.8M that Montreal is on the hook for.
Need to re-up Danault from the 3.083M that Montreal is currently on the hook for.
Need to re-up Armia as an UFA from the 2.6M that Montreal is currently on the hook for.
Need to re-up Lehkonen from the 2.4M that Montreal is currently on the hook for.
Need to re-up Kotkaniemi on a bridge deal up from the .925M that Montreal is currently on the hook for without bonuses.
Need to factor in the 2,75M more for Gallagher.
Need to factor in the .75M more for Petry.


8.575M - 3.5M for Gallagher and Petry raises already signed.

5.375M left over.

2.5M more for Danault, if he agrees to 5.5M

2.875M left over.

700K for Tatar, if he agrees to 5.5M

2.175M left over

900K if Armia agrees to 3.5M

1.275M left over.

350K if Lehkonen is bridged at 2.75M for a couple of years.

925K left over.

330K left over with a 22-man roster, 925 K already earned by KK and the 925K left over comes out to 2.188M, which is obviously not enough for a Kotkaniemi bridge deal. A 21-man roster would only take care of the IR needed for short term injuries.

IMO, we have to forget about Allen next year and use the extra savings for the KK bridge and that would enable us to keep most players we currently have that have any value. Switching Primeau in for Allen would free up an extra 2.075M and enable MON to bridge KK around 4M.

and losing Armia wouldn't be the and of the world if we can resign Tatar and Danault even if I don't think we will resign Tatar