Player Discussion Phillip Danault - Damn-oh ! Edition

[Ozmodiar]

Danault is a 2 or a 3 depending on linemates / depth at wing.

If they’re able to put him with winger(s) who can drive the offense, like Gallagher and Tatar, then that’s good enough for a second line.

Anisimov and an old Brad Richards were, at times, able to play on the second line because of Kane.

The Pens, OTOH, seemed to lack winger depth before they landed Kessel, so they needed 2 quality centers to carry the load

 

[ahmedou]

“No, for sure that's hurt... I think it's the same thing for everyone. You want to be at the PO. I felt that I'm still capable to play in the playoffs. But things can change briefly in hockey.”

“It's a huge challenge. Once, we'll go to the PO (soon) we would be hungrier and being a dangerous team.”

“Then, sometimes there's some situations where we aren't expect it. That's have been this season. A big difference.. Our team meetings were better as well. Last year wasn't fun. Then, this year I believe we're going into the right direction. We've great youngsters/veteran players. The chemistry was ok.”

“It began from the whole beginning. The 1st day of the next trainning camp will be intensively intensive. Like this year. I suppose that we're able to continue what we've done. We aren't missing many things. 96 points and you're not going to the PO... I gonna tell you that we've to take more points, I dunno...”

“Big changes in the league. The speed was one of our assets. The character that we've is very special here in Montreal. The attitude. Our feeling to win. Our determination. Respecting the system. Everybody has been going at the same direction. No, nobody wasn't dedicated. The vibe we had was completely different. Been well leading by our leaders. Price was solidly solid every night. Players were present every game. That's what we want in Montreal.”

“A real progression in my game. Myself and my teammates were happy of me. I want to help more the team as possible. In a 200 foot game. Defensively, I'm feeling like a third defenseman. Offensively, I took big faceoffs. A lot a pride on the PK. I'm happy about me from what I've done personally. More the expectations are increasing, the more I'll get better. That's what I want and that's what I'll do.”

“Dom (Ducharme) was solid. He gave us some little observations and comments to us. We applied them fastly enough. It's a great addition to the coaching staff.”

 

[Baksfamous112]

“DaNauLt iS TrAsH aNd BarELy a 3rD LiNeR”

 

[jaffy27]

Shaw won cups playing top-6 due to chemistry with line mates and Quenneville spreading the depth throughout the line up. Shaw was 8th in scoring (9th in PPG) on his team among FWDs in 2013 - that’s firmly bottom 6. He was 8th in scoring again in 2015.

And are we seriously using the Blackhawks as an example of contending with Shaw as a top-6?!

How delusional has this fan base become because of one season of almost making the playoffs when everything went our way?

WHAA??

What does almost making the playoffs have anything to do with me thinking Shaw can play top 6?????

He clearly can, if he can play a top 6 role with the Blackhawks, he clearly can with the Canadiens......it’s like you have it backwards lol

Happy Easter bud

 

[McGuires Corndog]

WHAA??

What does almost making the playoffs have anything to do with me thinking Shaw can play top 6?????

He clearly can, if he can play a top 6 role with the Blackhawks, he clearly can with the Canadiens......it’s like you have it backwards lol

Happy Easter bud

Of course he “can” play it, but we need better players below him (think the guy this thread is about).

There’s no doubt Shaw had excellent chemistry with Domi this season - and that’s how he can play a top-6 role. But you need to have superior players than him on that third line if you want to have a dangerous team. Not a Joel Armia.

Happy Easter to you as well my friend!

 

[BaseballCoach]

To me they aren’t legitimate top-6 options. Yes they can fill in during injuries, yes they can get 40ish points playing in that roll mostly due to ice time/usage... but that’s not ideal and that’s not how this team is ever going to compete.

I consider Byron and Shaw both “luxury” 3rd liners - and that’s exactly where they need to play if this team is going to be a legitimate contender.

I’m not sure how the LD is going to magically get better unless we acquire someone to fill the void. Mete is fine, but he’s not exactly a world beater offensively nor do I expect that to change. We need a Gostisbehere or someone of that ilk on the left side to change the dynamic of the blue line.

Shaw was 0.75 ppg this year with ice time of 15:55 per game, hardly excessive for his production. High 40s is what second line wingers get, so if he can get that, then he is not playing above his head.

That being said, of course if he were our 5th line RW and we had an all-star team suiting up for us, it would be better, but that is a FAR, FAR cry from saying that Shaw is "nowhere near" a top 6 winger.

BTW, did I say our LD was going to get "magically" better? I said we can compete without current forward group so long as Domi maintains his level, KK gets better and the GM upgrades our LD.

And our current forward group has only ONE of Shaw, Byron and Lehkonen in the top-6 so crocodile tears are not necessary.

Seriously, wing is not where our roster problems lie.

 

[Scriptor]

There's a few narratives that bother me on this and other boards.

The biggest one is when posters maintain that a player only got top-6 production because, essentially, he got top-6 minutes.

Seriously?

Those posters make it sound like anybody given top-6 minutes would get a top-6 production. At some point, logic needs to take over Ladies and Germs.

Danault only cracked 50 points because he was given top-line minutes?

Wow. Top-line minutes AT EVEN STRENGTH ONLY and, also, IN A SHUTDOWN ROLE against the opponents' best line, usually with plenty more D-zone starts than O-zone starts. Yeah, that sure sounds like a player that was spoon fed quality minutes undeservedly.

Shaw created stuff when he was on the ice. He deserved the .75 PPG production that he got when playing in a top-6 role because he contributed to his line producing. When he was injured, the team suffered as a result because it was now playing mostly on one line.

The only difference with Byron, honestly, is that he will score his points whether he plays in the top-6 or not. For that reason, alone, I would use him in the bottom-6, to add more scoring depth to a team in need of it.

The real argument that can be made isn't whether the players producing as top-6 players in top-6 minutes are top-6 players, but, rather, whether they are impactful players in a top-6 role. That means, are they dominant outside of the points they are putting up.

Do Byron, Shaw or Dananult put the fear of God in opponents and attract attention from the opposing Ds that frees up their line mates? Does their defensive play enable their line mates to concentrate more on their offensive strengths and better produce as a result? Do they break up plays and regularly contribute to a counter attack?

The argument can be made that, perhaps, to compete for the Cup, Montreal would need better top-6 players than Danault, Byron and/or Shaw, but not that these players aren't top-6 players.

Small nuance, IMO.

 

[ImNeverWrong]

Given that we have guys like Shaw/Lehkonen/Byron interchanging in and out of the Top 6 - if Suzuki is ready let him play. If he isn’t ready, than the AHL is the right call.

Those guys don’t below anywhere near a Top 6.

Disagree....handing top 6 spots to players because of pedigree and not merit is always a mistake. Shaw, byron and even lehkonen looked like they belonged in the top 6 late in the season. I'd love to see Suzuki steal a spot from one of these guys though. I think he can do it. But watching the playoffs I can tell you now, players like shaw and byron are 100% needed.

 

[Guns n Roses]

There's a few narratives that bother me on this and other boards.

The biggest one is when posters maintain that a player only got top-6 production because, essentially, he got top-6 minutes.

Seriously?

Those posters make it sound like anybody given top-6 minutes would get a top-6 production. At some point, logic needs to take over Ladies and Germs.

Danault only cracked 50 points because he was given top-line minutes?

Wow. Top-line minutes AT EVEN STRENGTH ONLY and, also, IN A SHUTDOWN ROLE against the opponents' best line, usually with plenty more D-zone starts than O-zone starts. Yeah, that sure sounds like a player that was spoon fed quality minutes undeservedly.

Shaw created stuff when he was on the ice. He deserved the .75 PPG production that he got when playing in a top-6 role because he contributed to his line producing. When he was injured, the team suffered as a result because it was now playing mostly on one line.

The only difference with Byron, honestly, is that he will score his points whether he plays in the top-6 or not. For that reason, alone, I would use him in the bottom-6, to add more scoring depth to a team in need of it.

The real argument that can be made isn't whether the players producing as top-6 players in top-6 minutes are top-6 players, but, rather, whether they are impactful players in a top-6 role. That means, are they dominant outside of the points they are putting up.

Do Byron, Shaw or Dananult put the fear of God in opponents and attract attention from the opposing Ds that frees up their line mates? Does their defensive play enable their line mates to concentrate more on their offensive strengths and better produce as a result? Do they break up plays and regularly contribute to a counter attack?

The argument can be made that, perhaps, to compete for the Cup, Montreal would need better top-6 players than Danault, Byron and/or Shaw, but not that these players aren't top-6 players.

Small nuance, IMO.

Danault’s offensive instincts are very limited. That’s why you don’t put him on your top 2 lines. You could never win a cup with Danault on the 1st or 2nd C.

 

[Scriptor]

Danault’s offensive instincts are very limited. That’s why you don’t put him on your top 2 lines. You could never win a cup with Danault on the 1st or 2nd C.

Depends on the rest of your lineup. Your idea of a lineup is very limited. If Tatar - Danault - Gallagher was your third offensive line in terms of production, but first in terms of TOI, because it went against and held opponents' top lines to less points than they garnered, you could have a winning team.

That would just mean that your other 6 players in the top-9 (TOI wise) benefitted from facing less opposition and being able to let there offensive instincts take over more, even if they had a few minutes less of ice time than Tatar - Danault - Gallagher did.

Danault having very limited offensive instincts, as you put it (even if you're exaggerating), doesn't prevent you from icing two other Cs and lines with superior offensive instincts, even of they don't face opponents' best lines (hence the lesser TOI). Lesser TOI can be used to exploit good players' energy level coming off shorter shifts where they were able to go balls to the wall during the entire shift.

Besides, the proper line mates for Danault, as we see with Tatar and Gallagher, can exploit Danault,s skill set and still lead to overall productive shifts, given the shutdown nature of the line, to begin with.

Your unwillingness to look at anything different than the model you have come up with for a line-up is what makes you unable to see any other possibilities.

Unfortunate as it fails to lead to any real conversation, IMO.

Many roads lead to Rome, even if All Roads Lead To Rome is a gross exaggeration.

 

[Guns n Roses]

The NHL game is played on the ice and all that matters is results.

You know who has offensive instincts? Nikita Scherbak, Corey Locke, Nigel Dawes, Anthony Duclair, Mark Barberio, and many, many more.

Do you know who gets results in the NHL? Philip Danault, Andrew Shaw, Paul Byron, Jordy Benn.

Yeah fun fact, Jordy Benn not only outscores Mark Barberio, but he actually had more ES points this year than PK Subban.

But just for my understanding, are you saying that every top-6 center must score 70 points in your books, or is 70 points just the number necessary to overcome your pre-judgment about players?

Will Suzuki need to score 70 points to be considered an offensive player?

So Benn > Subban right?

Andrew Shaw and Paul Byron are being played in their proper positions and thriving.

Danault is one of the best 3rd line centers in the league, maybe the best regular season 3C, but he has done nothing in the playoffs. He doesn’t belong anywhere close to a top 2C role on a true contender. You need high end skill and he just doesn’t have that.

Suzuki is going to be what ever he will be. I’ll be extremely disappointed if he isn’t a 60 point RW.

 

[Guns n Roses]

Depends on the rest of your lineup. Your idea of a lineup is very limited. If Tatar - Danault - Gallagher was your third offensive line in terms of production, but first in terms of TOI, because it went against and held opponents' top lines to less points than they garnered, you could have a winning team.

That would just mean that your other 6 players in the top-9 (TOI wise) benefitted from facing less opposition and being able to let there offensive instincts take over more, even if they had a few minutes less of ice time than Tatar - Danault - Gallagher did.

Danault having very limited offensive instincts, as you put it (even if you're exaggerating), doesn't prevent you from icing two other Cs and lines with superior offensive instincts, even of they don't face opponents' best lines (hence the lesser TOI). Lesser TOI can be used to exploit good players' energy level coming off shorter shifts where they were able to go balls to the wall during the entire shift.

Besides, the proper line mates for Danault, as we see with Tatar and Gallagher, can exploit Danault,s skill set and still lead to overall productive shifts, given the shutdown nature of the line, to begin with.

Your unwillingness to look at anything different than the model you have come up with for a line-up is what makes you unable to see any other possibilities.

Unfortunate as it fails to lead to any real conversation, IMO.

Many roads lead to Rome, even if All Roads Lead To Rome is a gross exaggeration.

See other possibilities? You mean the possibilities I have seen with Danault for the past 3 seasons? It doesn’t work. Ask Radulov how he enjoyed playing with Danault...

It is you who is unwilling to look at other possibilities and options. You will just agree with every single thing Claude Julien does.

Danault on the top 2 lines is one of the reasons we don’t make the playoffs, and you’re blind if you don’t see that.

 

[Kotkaniemi15]

See other possibilities? You mean the possibilities I have seen with Danault for the past 3 seasons? It doesn’t work. Ask Radulov how he enjoyed playing with Danault...

It is you who is unwilling to look at other possibilities and options. You will just agree with every single thing Claude Julien does.

Danault on the top 2 lines is one of the reasons we don’t make the playoffs, and you’re blind if you don’t see that.

Who else would you have played as the the other top six C? Domi is a staple in the top six so you’re really making this a KK vs Danault argument. I’m a huge KK fan but Danault was a much better option down the stretch. KK’s play went down a lot. You would’ve been in for a rude awakening if you would’ve gotten your way. I think KK should take his place next year but Danault helped us a lot this year. 53 points with elite defensive numbers is adequate for a top 6 centre on team going through a transition year. I’m not even Danault fan but this comment was so ridiculous. “... you’re blind if you don’t see that” LOL

 

[Apeironic]

Who else would you have played as the the other top six C? Domi is a staple in the top six so you’re really making this a KK vs Danault argument. I’m a huge KK fan but Danault was a much better option down the stretch. KK’s play went down a lot. You would’ve been in for a rude awakening if you would’ve gotten your way. I think KK should take his place next year but Danault helped us a lot this year. 53 points with elite defensive numbers is adequate for a top 6 centre on team going through a transition year. I’m not even Danault fan but this comment was so ridiculous. “... you’re blind if you don’t see that” LOL

Ya, this guy refuses to hear any logic whatsoever. I could not agree more with K15 that Danault was not in any way the "PROBLEM", nor should he be implicated in us missing the playoffs. This guy is a top of the line 3rd, but to think that he should be taken over by our youth movement so early on without taking into account the context of the team development is just ludicrous.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Of course he “can” play it, but we need better players below him (think the guy this thread is about).

There’s no doubt Shaw had excellent chemistry with Domi this season - and that’s how he can play a top-6 role. But you need to have superior players than him on that third line if you want to have a dangerous team. Not a Joel Armia.

Happy Easter to you as well my friend!

When building lines, you don't line them up based on skill one after the other. Shaw in a top 6 mix at RW is a good fit. He causes a lot of havoc up front and is full of energy. I think people need to throw away the hate towards Shaw and give him the respect he deserves. The team loves him and he shows up game after game. He had a great season and Julien has him playing very well in a solid role for our team.

Did you ever consider that Shaw helped Domi as much as Domi helped Shaw?

Danault, Shaw, Lehkonen, Mete, Juulsen, Armia, Kulak. These guys deserve respect for the season they had for us. It's not just about points people.

 

[Baksfamous112]

Danault’s offensive instincts are very limited. That’s why you don’t put him on your top 2 lines. You could never win a cup with Danault on the 1st or 2nd C.

Depends on the rest of your lineup. Your idea of a lineup is very limited. If Tatar - Danault - Gallagher was your third offensive line in terms of production, but first in terms of TOI, because it went against and held opponents' top lines to less points than they garnered, you could have a winning team.

That would just mean that your other 6 players in the top-9 (TOI wise) benefitted from facing less opposition and being able to let there offensive instincts take over more, even if they had a few minutes less of ice time than Tatar - Danault - Gallagher did.

Danault having very limited offensive instincts, as you put it (even if you're exaggerating), doesn't prevent you from icing two other Cs and lines with superior offensive instincts, even of they don't face opponents' best lines (hence the lesser TOI). Lesser TOI can be used to exploit good players' energy level coming off shorter shifts where they were able to go balls to the wall during the entire shift.

Besides, the proper line mates for Danault, as we see with Tatar and Gallagher, can exploit Danault,s skill set and still lead to overall productive shifts, given the shutdown nature of the line, to begin with.

Your unwillingness to look at anything different than the model you have come up with for a line-up is what makes you unable to see any other possibilities.

Unfortunate as it fails to lead to any real conversation, IMO.

Many roads lead to Rome, even if All Roads Lead To Rome is a gross exaggeration.

That is so wrong. I have never seen a whole 3rd line each put up 50+ points in a season. That’s just insane and impossible for a team to get to because of the salary cap.

FYI, after Bergeron, Pastrnak, Marchand and Kreijci, the forward with most points in Boston had 42. Yet they were and still are regarded as a favorite to win the cup.

The 5th highest scorer of the Islander this year was Eberle at 37 points.

The 5th best F of the so-called powerhouse now that is the Blue Jackets is Boone Jenner at 38 points, and that’s including Duchene.

The so-called 2nd line in Vegas (technically your 4th, 5th and 6th best F, which is supposed to be in your top 6) was Tuch, Statsny and Eakin at 52, 42 and 41 points.

The 6th best F scorer of the Avalanche this year, Colin Wilson, finished with 27 points.

The 6th best scoring F for St-Louis, Schwartz, finished the year with 36 points.

The so called Toronto offensive powerhouse had Johnsson finishing 6th in scoring for forwards with 43 points.

Nashville’s 4th best forward, Craig Smith, finished the year with 36 points.

Dallas’s 4th, 5th and 6th best scoring forward respectively finished the year with 30, 27, and 26 points, yet they are 1 game away from eliminating Nashville.

I only went with the teams that are still alive in the playoff. Anyway, keep telling yourself Danault isn’t worthy of 2nd line role if it makes you feel better. He’d have 2nd line production on ALL the remaining playoff teams are still fighting for the cup

 

[Scriptor]

See other possibilities? You mean the possibilities I have seen with Danault for the past 3 seasons? It doesn’t work. Ask Radulov how he enjoyed playing with Danault...

It is you who is unwilling to look at other possibilities and options. You will just agree with every single thing Claude Julien does.

Danault on the top 2 lines is one of the reasons we don’t make the playoffs, and you’re blind if you don’t see that.

I don't consider Danault as one of the two offensive Cs on this team when we have our younger players mature and are closer to being contenders, but I can still see Danault centering Tatar and Gallagher while playing top-6 minutes in a shutdown role (not as one of our remaining two offensive Cs and lines).

That's what you fail to understand (or fail to be willing to understand -- I hope it is the latter as it would speak to your stubbornness and not to a lack of ability to conceptualize).

Danault certainly didn't prevent Gallagher from scoring 30+ goals and Tatar from scoring 25. Danault certainly contributed to his line having a +48 goal differential against the opponents' best players for the season. Danault certainly didn't steal any PP minutes from more offensive Cs.

You act like Danault and his line are stealing choice minutes from more productive offensive players. That's ridiculous. They are rather eating up the most difficult minutes -- plenty of them, for sure -- but difficult minutes nonetheless, which they are turning into a distinct positive.

It's up to Bergevin to supply decent wingers for Domi and Kotkaniemi so they can better benefit from not facing the opponents' best players and contribute offensively. Nothing prevents Julien from dosing out similar minutes to the other two more offensive lines and benefitting from fresher offensive players against weaker opponents.

Honestly, what's so difficult to understand?

I see your model clearly, from the start. I just think it is short-sighted and outdated. I'm actually not a fan of Julien at all, so I don't see your point. I can dislike a coach and still agree with how he deploys some of his players. Even if I didn't agree with how he deployed the line of Tatar - Danault - Gallagher, how they performed while exploited that way would prove I was pissing in the wind.

 

[Scriptor]

Who else would you have played as the the other top six C? Domi is a staple in the top six so you’re really making this a KK vs Danault argument. I’m a huge KK fan but Danault was a much better option down the stretch. KK’s play went down a lot. You would’ve been in for a rude awakening if you would’ve gotten your way. I think KK should take his place next year but Danault helped us a lot this year. 53 points with elite defensive numbers is adequate for a top 6 centre on team going through a transition year. I’m not even Danault fan but this comment was so ridiculous. “... you’re blind if you don’t see that” LOL

Even if you plugged Kotkaniemi between Tatar and Gallagher, its not like Kotkaniemi would have gotten 82 points (29 more than Danault) and gallagher would have been transformed into a 50-goal scorer, with tatar reaching 40.

I just don't see the argument of marginalizing Danault's performance on a line that had a positive, 48-goal differential against our opponents' top players.

What we should argue for is better wingers for Kotkaniemi so he can capitalize on weaker opposition in an offensive, third line role next season and, perhaps, a better RW/LW for Domi, depending on which side Drouin ends up playing next year and who we can get off the UFA market.

 

[Scriptor]

That is so wrong. I have never seen a whole 3rd line each put up 50+ points in a season. That’s just insane and impossible for a team to get to because of the salary cap.

FYI, after Bergeron, Pastrnak, Marchand and Kreijci, the forward with most points in Boston had 42. Yet they were and still are regarded as a favorite to win the cup.

The 5th highest scorer of the Islander this year was Eberle at 37 points.

The 5th best F of the so-called powerhouse now that is the Blue Jackets is Boone Jenner at 38 points, and that’s including Duchene.

The so-called 2nd line in Vegas (technically your 4th, 5th and 6th best F, which is supposed to be in your top 6) was Tuch, Statsny and Eakin at 52, 42 and 41 points.

The 6th best F scorer of the Avalanche this year, Colin Wilson, finished with 27 points.

The 6th best scoring F for St-Louis, Schwartz, finished the year with 36 points.

The so called Toronto offensive powerhouse had Johnsson finishing 6th in scoring for forwards with 43 points.

Nashville’s 4th best forward, Craig Smith, finished the year with 36 points.

Dallas’s 4th, 5th and 6th best scoring forward respectively finished the year with 30, 27, and 26 points, yet they are 1 game away from eliminating Nashville.

I only went with the teams that are still alive in the playoff. Anyway, keep telling yourself Danault isn’t worthy of 2nd line role if it makes you feel better. He’d have 2nd line production on ALL the remaining playoff teams are still fighting for the cup

I'll argue that MON, while not having a top line with the production you see for COL's top line, for example, can perhaps find more production from it's 7th, 8th and 9th forwards. It might have to go with youth, but surely, with a few more minutes, Kotkaniemi could, in his 2nd year with more experience and physical maturity, plus a better RW, get more points.

If Montreal grabbed a quality LW/RW UFA for the Domi-Drouin tandem to play with (you play Drouin on whichever side isn't filled after signing your UFA), a kid line of Lehkonen - Kotkaniemi - Suzuki could be more productive than Lehkonen - Kotkaniemi - Armia was this season.

A 4th line of Byron - Poehling - Shaw wouldn't be chopped liver either. Perhaps Shaw could end up being the right wing on the Kotkaniemi line while Suzuki was eased into the NHL on a still somewhat exciting line with Byron and Poehling.

In either case, Montreal's overall offense would have the potential to be much more productive than many teams' offense, even they they might boast a stronger first line production. Montreal would also be a lot harder to shutdown as an offense.

 

[Scriptor]

Hilarious. The Danault line has been the go-to shutdown line all season and the sexy stats like Corsi - as well as the mundane stats - illustrate what a load of dingo's kidneys you're talking here.

Saying that Danault isn't a top centre is one thing (and you'd be right). Saying he's flat out bad and a ridiculous excuse for a top 6 centre - in defiance of ALL the evidence this season - is either attention seeking, delusional or simply trolling.

A happy mix of all three, maybe? Danault's line was a whopping +48 in goal differential while playing against opponents's best players. That stat is comparable to some of the best Cs and their lines in the NHL.

Plenty of room for two more offensive lines outside of the Danault line, with one facing even lesser third line opponents. It also wouldn't take much other than a quality UFA winger signing and an inspired rookie to bump up the production of those two other lines (other than Danault's line).

The UFA winger could truly bump up the production of a Domi - Drouin tandem that would face the tougher remaining opposition. a rookie RW like Suzuki could get a somewhat more sheltered role alongside the tandem of Lehkonen - Kotkaniemi.

Veteran wingers like Byron and shaw could help facilitate Poehling's arrival in the league as a 4th line C on a line that could also generate offensive production.

 

[Walrus26]

A happy mix of all three, maybe? Danault's line was a whopping +48 in goal differential while playing against opponents's best players. That stat is comparable to some of the best Cs and their lines in the NHL.

Plenty of room for two more offensive lines outside of the Danault line, with one facing even lesser third line opponents. It also wouldn't take much other than a quality UFA winger signing and an inspired rookie to bump up the production of those two other lines (other than Danault's line).

The UFA winger could truly bump up the production of a Domi - Drouin tandem that would face the tougher remaining opposition. a rookie RW like Suzuki could get a somewhat more sheltered role alongside the tandem of Lehkonen - Kotkaniemi.

Veteran wingers like Byron and shaw could help facilitate Poehling's arrival in the league as a 4th line C on a line that could also generate offensive production.

Whatever question you're posing here, the answer is "Panarin" ;-)

 

[angusyoung]

PD is a player that really perplexes me. I think you have to see him play from ice level to get a proper distinction of the player he be.

The line he was on was one of the best overall. Yet,he was hardly noticeable in the overall scheme of things,but stats don't lie.Is it simply a solid line with the right blend? shuts down top opposition readily and contributes offensively.

 

[ahmedou]

“We all know that in Montreal, it's very publicised... When you win, it's the best thing in the world. But when you lose, it's probably the worst... Finally, I can say that it's no that bad at all. It's fun to play here, it's very easy to evolve in front of these fans. They're quite simply incredibles.”

“It's sure it's possible for a Quebecer to play in Montreal. We were like five or six from here too. It's a start of a building stuffs something like that. There's many Quebecers within the organization, with the Laval Rocket. More guys from here want to play for the Canadiens and we're starting to bring them more. At the time, local players were a part of those winning franchises. So it's a good thing that we've more of them.”

“You don't have to watch too much the social media and giving a lot of time on it. Some haters, people who don't like you. There's some for real. That being said, there's more people who like you than hate you. You got to stick on the positives and finding a way to leave with it. The word carapace comes back often, but that's it tho... Building a carapace and you leave yourself from the negative stuffs. Concentrate to the positive stuffs.”

“I think the adaptation was even more important for my wife than me. Day after day, they were involved with me and their life has changed too. Marie-Pierre has never asked to be publicised like that. And all of a sudden people began to recognize here when she goes in the grocery. She had to adapt to that and she created a carapace. Me and here are one. We got no choice. Because if I was alone I'd not think it's possible to be honest...”

“In the media side, Dominick Saillant and Francois Marchand guide us very well. For the remaining stuffs, it go to be from us... That's some little objectives of life that we got to fix and accomplish by yourself. Marie and me are here and there together. And we built our life around that.”

“Now, I want to win here. The 2017/2018 season was difficult we forgotten that from our mind. In the 2016/2017 season, I had the chance to be in the PO. Even if it was only the 1st round, it's the best thing I had experienced as a player until now. Montreal will always be Montreal. The fans and the vibes in the PO which makes this place very special and I'm ready to have a good run in the PO.”

 

[barbu]

That is so wrong. I have never seen a whole 3rd line each put up 50+ points in a season. That’s just insane and impossible for a team to get to because of the salary cap.

FYI, after Bergeron, Pastrnak, Marchand and Kreijci, the forward with most points in Boston had 42. Yet they were and still are regarded as a favorite to win the cup.

The 5th highest scorer of the Islander this year was Eberle at 37 points.

The 5th best F of the so-called powerhouse now that is the Blue Jackets is Boone Jenner at 38 points, and that’s including Duchene.

The so-called 2nd line in Vegas (technically your 4th, 5th and 6th best F, which is supposed to be in your top 6) was Tuch, Statsny and Eakin at 52, 42 and 41 points.

The 6th best F scorer of the Avalanche this year, Colin Wilson, finished with 27 points.

The 6th best scoring F for St-Louis, Schwartz, finished the year with 36 points.

The so called Toronto offensive powerhouse had Johnsson finishing 6th in scoring for forwards with 43 points.

Nashville’s 4th best forward, Craig Smith, finished the year with 36 points.

Dallas’s 4th, 5th and 6th best scoring forward respectively finished the year with 30, 27, and 26 points, yet they are 1 game away from eliminating Nashville.

I only went with the teams that are still alive in the playoff. Anyway, keep telling yourself Danault isn’t worthy of 2nd line role if it makes you feel better. He’d have 2nd line production on ALL the remaining playoff teams are still fighting for the cup

Thanks for bringing some sanity in this thread.

 

[ZUKI]

See other possibilities? You mean the possibilities I have seen with Danault for the past 3 seasons? It doesn’t work. Ask Radulov how he enjoyed playing with Danault...

It is you who is unwilling to look at other possibilities and options. You will just agree with every single thing Claude Julien does.

Danault on the top 2 lines is one of the reasons we don’t make the playoffs, and you’re blind if you don’t see that.

The Reason we didn't make the playoffs is because of the PP , and guess what , Danault wasn't a part of it ." And you're blind if you don't see that "