Player Discussion Phillip Danault 1st line 3rd C Edition

[Habit11]

He might not be happy with what he gets in free agency in a flat cap era.

Not when nearly a dozen teams wouldn't sign him to play in their top 6 because they have better Cs in house. He can probably get $6m on a team with plenty of cap space and minimal depth at center.

 

[Not The One]

No point trying to reason with this guy, he just hates Danault. I could respect someone saying he'd prefer moving on in the future with Suzuki and KK, but to constantly diminish what Danault is doing is just bad faith.

Like I said in another post, Suzuki can probably fill some of Danault's role, but KK clearly is not ready. He spent exactly 53 seconds on the PK in his entire NHL career to date. It would be insane to expect that he could take over Danault's responsibilities'.

 

[Mrb1p]

Because Danault is better and cheaper than any center that we can reasonably acquire. He's our rental, I'm not sure why you don't see this. It's our best year to do any damage because the team is most likely going to be worse next year.

Why would the team be worse next year? Its 100% possible to downgrade on Danault while picking up an asset. A guy like Lowry would make the team competitive still and we'd be able to at least retain some value out of Danault.

Theres plenty of teams out there that would love Danault, if hes made available, someone will be willing to pay the price for sure.

 

[Redux91]

He might not be happy with what he gets in free agency in a flat cap era.

Thats why his "entitlement" is becoming more and more infuriating
I absolutely cannot get over he would refuse THAT good a contract, and thinks hes worth that much more
I cant believe he truly thinks hes a number 1C in this league ...and we really let it happen...

 

[26Mats]

You needed to be more clear, my apologies. So if Columbus says they don't want Danault, then what?

we'll see who else is available between now and deadline - and if Danault doesn't re-sign with us by then anyways.

 

[Mrb1p]

Like I said in another post, Suzuki can probably fill some of Danault's role, but KK clearly is not ready. He spent exactly 53 seconds on the PK in his entire NHL career to date. It would be insane to expect that he could take over Danault's responsibilities'.

Any player can be a PK player, they literally only need Danault because hes good at faceoffs, they dont need him there for anything else, in fact they ran Byron/Lekhonen and Armia/Toffoli a whole lot so far.

 

[Not The One]

Thats why his "entitlement" is becoming more and more infuriating
I absolutely cannot get over he would refuse THAT good a contract, and thinks hes worth that much more

Explain why 5M is such a good contract for Danault when Gallagher and Anderson have gotten respectively 6.5M and 5.5M last summer from MB.

 

[CristianoRonaldo]

Did he really lose a lot of fans in the process, though? Has anyone read the multitude of threads about Danault over the last few years?

Maybe it genuinely applies to you (I won't bother checking your posting history) but, I think it's precious to suggest Danault had a ton of fans on these boards to begin with.

People are two-faced when it suits them around these parts.

That's because Hf Habs is the elite , on Reddit, he has plenty of delusional fans.

Personally, my opinion of him never changed, I don't like him as a top-6 player.

 

[SpeedyPotato]

Well that changes everything for me, if he really turned 5m down for 6 years, he's gone for me I don't care. Get PLD to replace him.

 

[Runner77]

No, I didn't say trade him away for picks and scraps, that is your interjection. It's that interjection that makes it illogical.

Ideally, if he doesn't sign a contract, we include him as a piece, not the main piece, but a piece in a Dubois deal. Aside from Dubois, we'll see who's available between now and deadline. I'm not privy to that information, so hard to speculate on what a deal could like - AGAIN, IF HE DOESN'T WANT TO SIGN A DEAL.

I'm assuming Danault would not extend with CBJ, given how his camp have been sticklers about the reported offer they received from Bergevin.

Also, CBJ drives a hard bargain when it comes to contracts so Danault would not likely get a better offer than he got from Bergevin. Hence, there would be no sign and trade, he'd only be a rental for them.

Essentially, I don't see Danault as a viable option for CBJ. Seems to me that if he remains unsigned, he's either a TDL candidate to a non-division team or the Habs take a chance and keep riding him through the playoffs. I suspect the latter is most likely to happen. The time for a Danault trade has likely passed -- it should have happened at the time that Danault came out and announced he might not re-sign with the Habs.

 

[26Mats]

I'm assuming Danault would not extend with CBJ, given how his camp have been sticklers about the reported offer they received from Bergevin.

Also, CBJ drives a hard bargain when it comes to contracts so Danault would not likely get a better offer than he got from Bergevin. Hence, there would be no sign and trade, he'd only be a rental for them.

Essentially, I don't see Danault as a viable option for CBJ. Seems to me that if he remains unsigned, he's either a TDL candidate to a non-division team or the Habs take a chance and keep riding him through the playoffs. I suspect the latter is most likely to happen. The time for a Danault trade has likely passed -- it should have happened at the time that Danault came out and announced he might not re-sign with the Habs.

I see CBJ as a viable option because Danault wants a certain role and I could see Columbus, with their lack of centers, giving it to him. Also, although Columbus has been known to be hard bargainers, they offered Panarin somethinglike 12 to 14 million. And, they gave out big deals to the likes of Dubinsky and Foligno. I could see them offering Phil 6M, since they're not up against the cap as we are.

 

[Redux91]

Explain why 5M is such a good contract for Danault when Gallagher and Anderson have gotten respectively 6.5M and 5.5M last summer from MB.

I mean, what is there to explain..?
one has scored 30 a couple times, the other is a 27 goal scoring power forward that skates like the wind
Danault got 13 goals a couple times, thats cute.
Yes yesss we all know his job is not to score goals, hes great defensively hes good on face offs
Why the f*** should we pay more than 5M a year for even just all of that?
Explain.

 

[Runner77]

I see CBJ as a viable option because Danault wants a certain role and I could see Columbus giving it to him. Also, although Columbus has been known to be hard bargainers, they offered Panarin somethinglike 12 to 14 million. I could see them offering Phil 6M, since they're not up against the cap as we are.

You realize they gave up on Anderson for 500K more that he was asking per year and and the extra contract year? I doubt very much they'd be willing to pay $6M for a 14 goal scorer. I also doubt that the Danault clan would agree to a sign and trade when they can test the market and be in a city that Danault really likes.

 

[Not The One]

Well that changes everything for me, if he really turned 5m down for 6 years, he's gone for me I don't care. Get PLD to replace him.

Here's a fun fact: Over the last two years PLD had gotten a grand total of 21 minutes of PK-time. 16% of his faceoffs (312/1913) have been in the defensive zone, which seems to indicate that Torts doesn't really trust him there. In comparison, Danault has taken 41% of his faceoffs in the DZ (1243/3009). Not arguing that PLD is better than Danault overall, but he certainly can't fill his role right now.

 

[26Mats]

You realize they gave up on Anderson for 500K more that he was asking per year and and the extra contract year? I doubt very much they'd be willing to pay $6M for a 14 goal scorer. I also doubt that the Danault clan would agree to a sign and trade when they may want to test the market.

fair assumptions.

I assume Danault will sign for what he thinks he's worth and the role he wants...

I assume CBJ didn't want to give that big of a contract to Anderson after his injury plagued, poor season. But you may be right: Tortorella even publicly lamented losing Anderson - it seems it was all a decision from stubborn in contract negotiations Kekalainen.

 

[Habit11]

You realize they gave up on Anderson for 500K more that he was asking per year and and the extra contract year? I doubt very much they'd be willing to pay $6M for a 14 goal scorer. I also doubt that the Danault clan would agree to a sign and trade when they can test the market and be in a city that Danault really likes.

That might be a blunder. We saw the decompression on salaries after last season where the teams had ticket revenue through nearly the entire season. If the whole league goes all season + playoffs without any ticket revenue, combined with the flat cap, his camp may need to pick up some side hustles to compensate for turning down the "rumoured" contract.

 

[Kriss E]

I'm assuming Danault would not extend with CBJ, given how his camp have been sticklers about the reported offer they received from Bergevin.

Also, CBJ drives a hard bargain when it comes to contracts so Danault would not likely get a better offer than he got from Bergevin. Hence, there would be no sign and trade, he'd only be a rental for them.

Essentially, I don't see Danault as a viable option for CBJ. Seems to me that if he remains unsigned, he's either a TDL candidate to a non-division team or the Habs take a chance and keep riding him through the playoffs. I suspect the latter is most likely to happen. The time for a Danault trade has likely passed -- it should have happened at the time that Danault came out and announced he might not re-sign with the Habs.

Danault might change his mind and wanna stay here if we keep up our play. Playing for Montreal when they're doing well can be a very enticing thing.

 

[Runner77]

fair assumptions.

I assume Danault will sign for what he thinks he's worth and the role he wants...

I assume CBJ didn't want to give that big of a contract to Anderson after his injury plagued, poor season. But you may be right: Tortorella even publicly lamented losing Anderson - it seems it was all a decision from stubborn in contract negotiations Kekalainen.

Well they did make a substantial offer to Anderson, so that's not a consideration. You don't not make a deal with a player you really like, on account of so little separating the parties. CLB nickels and dimes -- exactly what Fiset/Meehan won't endorse.

 

[CristianoRonaldo]

The question is , can we (HABS) live without Phillip Danault ?

I personally think so.

Of course we can, it's Phillip Danault, not McDavid. You can put almost any defensive player with Gally and Tatar and he will get around 40 points/82 games.

 

[Runner77]

Danault might change his mind and wanna stay here if we keep up our play. Playing for Montreal when they're doing well can be a very enticing thing.

His putz agents should get on the phone, then. What are they waiting for?

 

[Not The One]

I mean, what is there to explain..?
one has scored 30 a couple times, the other is a 27 goal scoring power forward that skates like the wind
Danault got 13 goals a couple times, thats cute.
Yes yesss we all know his job is not to score goals, hes great defensively hes good on face offs
Why the f*** should we pay more than 5M a year for even just all of that?
Explain.

So now that we're talking about Danault the ONLY things that should count about a player's production is goals?

LOL.

 

[Runner77]

That might be a blunder. We saw the decompression on salaries after last season where the teams had ticket revenue through nearly the entire season. If the whole league goes all season + playoffs without any ticket revenue, combined with the flat cap, his camp may need to pick up some side hustles to compensate for turning down the "rumoured" contract.

Flat cap is projected to last 2-3 seasons. Meantime, the NHL is incurring a lot of debt. This is not a great climate for grand posturing.

I'm getting the impression Danault overplayed his hand and got too greedy, possibly due to misguided agent advice.

 

[Mrb1p]

Of course we can, it's Phillip Danault, not McDavid. You can put almost any defensive player with Gally and Tatar and he will get around 40 points/82 games.

BUT WHO WILL PLAY PK

 

[26Mats]

Well they did make a substantial offer to Anderson, so that's not a consideration. You don't not make a deal with a player you really like, on account of so little separating the parties. CLB nickels and dimes -- exactly what Fiset/Meehan won't endorse.

They nickle and dime - certain players.

They didn't nickle and dime Panarin, Foligno and Dubinsky.

And I'm not sure we can call what they did with Anderson nickle and diming. Many (greater than 50%?) on here thought the Josh Anderson contract MB gave him was way too much - too risky long term, especially for a player of his style and history. So it's at least understandable that Kekalainen didn't want to take the risk Anderson's agent was threatening him to make. MB said, the choice he had was sign Anderson to that deal, or let Anderson go to free agency and test the market.

So, sure it's possible Danault does the same thing. But just as we were weak when it came to size on the wings, and thus were more willing to acquiesce to Anderson's demands, Columbus are weaker than us at center, and may be more willing than us to acquiesce to Danault's demands.

 

[Vachon23]

That might be a blunder. We saw the decompression on salaries after last season where the teams had ticket revenue through nearly the entire season. If the whole league goes all season + playoffs without any ticket revenue, combined with the flat cap, his camp may need to pick up some side hustles to compensate for turning down the "rumoured" contract.

He can still choose where he play and I'm not sure Columbus is on top of his list