Discussion in 'Montreal Canadiens' started by ahmedou, Nov 24, 2018.
Not much to add then, was nice chatting with you
Kotkaniemi fanboys are more concerned about Kotkaniemi's stats being stifled by "lesser wingers" than they are about the team's success or his proper long-term development.
They think shitting on Danault is a way to get what they want rather than being patient and waiting for Kotkaniemi to make the most of the opportunities that come to him naturally (in game situations).
That's all this thread is about.
I too hope that Kotkaniemi grows into a player that can handle Danault's current workload and be successful, and I have no fear that he won't be given the opportunity when the time is right. Patience.
you mean the team that lost his last four ? or the team that has seen Tatar AND Gallagher production drop ?
He's been ok this season. Probably not suited for the role he's being put in.
I think we should all remember that Phillip ''one goal'' Danault plays in the super NHL, so, his one extra point than Kotkaniemi's is worth, like, at least 10.
I agree... Right now I don't really care because I want a top 3 pick somehow. For a competitive team, Danault has no place on the 2nd line. A 2C must have offensive talent which he really does not. I appreciate how responsible he is defensively which is really the description of a 3C. Strong D and a bit of offence.
You can be one dimensional in Montreal, and no one will bat an eye. You just can't be bad defensively.
I know I already posted this like a ton of times but it seems like some of you still missed it so I always enjoy to post it once again.
The year he was apparently being carried... and his stats were inflated...
Pacioretty-Danault-Radulov 37GP 16P .43 ppg
Pacioretty-Danault-Gallagher 8GP 5P .62 ppg
Pacioretty-Danault-Shaw 5GP 3P .60 ppg
Lehkonen-Danault-Shaw 8GP 6P .75 ppg
Danault-Mitchell-Flynn 13GP 6P .46 ppg
Now tell me how he inflated his stats on that top line? He actually produced more away from Radulov as bizarre that could sound!
Kotkaniemi is very sheltered against opposition's top lines. He gets very favourable zone starts. He's still really bad at faceoffs. And he's the youngest player in the league.
Why people want him to take Danault's role, which is basically to take defensive zone shifts against the other teams top players and finish you shift in the offensive zone, out-shoot and outchance.
Danault isn't a top line center. But he plays an important role for the team AND for Kotkaniemi's development. Kotka isn't strong enough or experienced enough to play the minutes that Danault is right now. I expect he will be, but its unreasonable and unfair to expect it now.
And why Danault is getting the Desharnais treatment is beyond me. He's a poor man's Plekanec on a team without an Eller. He's strong defensively and in transition. His goalscoring is not and wont ever be a strength, but he's an underrated playmaker.
Eventually Danault will be this team's 3rd line center when Kotkaniemi gets stronger and more experienced. For now, he's playing an important role in aiding and abetting Kotkaniemi's development.
The post above written by Captain Mountain says it all.
Danault will eventually play in the right chair: 3rd line center, when Kotkaniemi will have mature physically and gain the proper experience to play top-six.
But patience around here is rare. And bashing local kids is a favourite sport.
Phillip Danault w Max Pacioretty, even strength, GF/60 2.62
Phillip Danault w/o Max Pacioretty, even strength, GF/60 2.28
Max Pacioretty w/o Phillip Danault, even strength, GF/60 3.58
Phillip Danault w Alex Radulov, even strength, GF/60 2.79
Phillip Danault w/o Alex Radulov, even strength, GF/60 2.25
Alex Radulov w/o Phillip Danault, even strength, GF/60 3.19
So true in Montreal. It’s almost like a company mission or vision
Not all of Danault's minutes are against top opposition. He's just the only center that we have playing more than an average percentage of his ice time against top opposition. Moreover, Julien only has so much control over matchups. He controls only roughly half of all faceoffs, and half of all shifts are started on the fly.
I mean, we get it, Danault takes some tough shifts. But not all of those shifts are tough minutes, and those minutes don't have to be played with our best offensive wingers.
How this dismisses what I said?
The point being made all the time around here is that Danault was being carried and his stats were apparently inflated, but in reality, he was producing less on the top line.
Philly will score a goal tonight.
The problem is, who are you going to offload it too? Domi and his line are great at creating dangerous scoring chances, but if it wasn't for percentages, that line would be in trouble defensively. Kotkaniemi isn't ready for difficult defensive match-ups yet.
And lets not pretend the Danault line has been bad or that Danault has been majorly unproductive or anything. He's producing like RNH, Larkin, Krejci, Barzal, Zibanejad, Koivu, Hischier, Barkov, etc. at ES. And he's not used on the PP.
Danault on the first line is not an issue right now. Defensive breakdowns and LHD depth, Price's play and lack of pace are the bigger issues right now.
Getting Byron back already helps Montreal get Kotkaniemi better wingers. He's a great ES winger. Lehkonen's shot has been iffy, but he creates better than most of the Habs wingers.
Lol at the sample size.
Give him 80 games with Lehkonen and then tell me
Hes insulated whether you like it or not
26 game sample size. Now that’s funny
I'm not suggesting we take away Danault's tough minutes and give them to someone else. I'm saying that not all his minutes are tough, and that a large portion of them could be played by someone else. You don't have to give Jesperi all or any of Danault's defensive zone starts against opposing first lines. I'd be happy to see Danault get all of those. And I don't think he needs Gallagher and Tatar with him when he plays those minutes.
And you can add Jesperi Kotkaniemi to your little list of names, only with almost an hour less total ice time and inferior linemates.
By your own numbers, he produced 66% of his points when he was with both or one of Radulov and/or Pacioretty. So your numbers don't support what you're saying. And moreover, my numbers show that Danault's effect on both Pacioretty and Radulov was negative, offensively. So yes, he was being carried when he was playing with those clearly superior players.
Sample size plays a big part in this. Looking at ppg over an 8 game stretch for example isn't very useful.
That said I don't believe the Danault gets carried narrative. It was a concern after that first year when he played with Pacioretty & Radulov and had a huge production boost relative to previous years.
However last year Danault's production was almost identical without Radulov. He still played with Pacioretty, but Pacioretty was terrible that year. It's hard to claim a guy is carried by someone who scores 17 goals all season and was on pace for 21 goals and 47 points. And his other winger was Shaw, so again no help.
It doesn't look like Danault gets a big production boost from playing with top players. His production boost has seemingly come from increased ice-time, and confidence. He should be good for 40ish points when used in a top-6 regardless of who his wingers are. Whether 40 points from your 2nd line center is good enough is of course debateable.
The guy barely cracked 200 NHL games, with your logic everything about him is funny.
I'm confused. Are you suggesting Julien should be scrambling lines mid-game consistently? Or are you suggesting Montreal shout play one of Tatar or Gallagher less so that Kotkaniemi gets better wingers? There aren't that many more minutes you can give Kotkaniemi at ES. Especially since Julien has been giving those minutes to Domi lately, not Danault. And Kotkaniemi is on the PP1 unit now.
As for my list, what makes you think Kotkaniemi would be producing more with Tatar and Gallagher? Your premise seems to assume that because he's been good with lesser linemates he will be better with better linemates. Which isn't a given. I'd rather he do what he's doing now. Working on face-offs and fundamentals in a good environment. Getting favourable offensive minutes. Playing on the PP.
No, my numbers show that he was producing all over the lineup.
I am suggesting that Julien manage his bench more actively and creatively, yes. In many situations, I would prefer Kotkaniemi to play with Gallagher and Tatar. For example, if we are trailing in a game, I don't see any reason to put Danault out on the ice ahead of Jesperi. If we're leading, it's pretty clear Danault should be on the ice ahead of Jesperi. Offensive zone draw? Why put Danault out with Gallagher and Tatar? Defensive zone draw against the opponent's top line? Why put Jesperi in that position?
I think that's pretty reasonable, so far as assumptions go. Moreover, I think Gallagher and Tatar could perhaps produce more if they weren't saddled with Phillip One Goal.
With one or both of pacioretty/Radulov: 26 points.
Without: 12 points.
Durrrr he was producing all over the lineup durrrrrr
Separate names with a comma.