Player Discussion Phillip Danault: What's My Line Edition

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lshap

Hardline Moderate
Jun 6, 2011
27,276
24,865
Montreal
yeah, ok.
Now, for those that are not finding agendas behind their criticism of Danault , refocus on the number of time the opposite teams didn't score in these last 35 games, because the play of Danault and his 2 linemates.

I really don't give a shit about Danault's number of goals. I give a shit about the number of goals his line scores versus the number of goals the opposite lines score
There's no way to rationalize your way around 1 goal in 35 games. Stating you "Don't give a shit" about the single most important part of a forward's job isn't an argument. Yes, we all know Danault is an excellent defensive forward, but without offence he's not contributing as much as he should. Certainly not enough to justify anything close to a $5M salary.

You're spending a lot of energy creating make-believe stories of people hating the player. The reality is straightforward as the numbers: he's playing poorly in a contract year. There's a large disconnect between what he wants and the level at which he's playing. Personally, I love the Danault from two years ago until the first half of the 2019/20 season. That player is very valuable; the player we're currently seeing... much less so.
 

MarkovsKnee

Global Moderator
Nov 21, 2007
50,987
60,973
Toronto
Frankly, at this point his value is Bonino, Eller, Pageau. The Habs offer was based off Pageau apparently.

Eller: $3.5m
Bonino: $4.1m
Pageau: $5m

Pageau is the absolute max, which is Habs offer.

Think he isn't worth more than the average of the 3 -- $4.2m. All you have to do is look at Vancouver to see how damaging it can be to overpay guys who aren't highly skilled, but of the hard working sort.

Stuck with huge contracts like Sutter, etc.

Not sure how well Danault will age.
 

CHfan1

Registered User
Apr 23, 2012
8,024
9,252
There's no way to rationalize your way around 1 goal in 35 games. Stating you "Don't give a shit" about the single most important part of a forward's job isn't an argument. Yes, we all know Danault is an excellent defensive forward, but without offence he's not contributing as much as he should. Certainly not enough to justify anything close to a $5M salary.

You're spending a lot of energy creating make-believe stories of people hating the player. The reality is straightforward as the numbers: he's playing poorly in a contract year. There's a large disconnect between what he wants and the level at which he's playing. Personally, I love the Danault from two years ago until the first half of the 2019/20 season. That player is very valuable; the player we're currently seeing... much less so.

Agreed with the above.

Also if we are looking at goals for and against at even strength. At the start of last season, in his first 50 games Danault was on the ice for 51 goals for and 33 against at even strength.

Since then (from January 27, 2020) Danault has played 43 games, including playoffs, and has been on the ice for 28 goals for and 26 against at even strength. That’s not exactly great. Since the return to play in August he’s been on the ice for 12 goals for and 13 against in 22 games.

In fairness he does get the tougher match-ups and takes more of the defensive zone face-offs.

But with that and 2 goals for in that time period (including his empty netter in the play-offs) I agree I don’t know how he can get a 6 year contract at $5 million + in this market (flat cap and all) unless he turns it around this season. I really hope he does but Bergevin is being smart by being patient and waiting till the offseason to discuss his contract.
 
Last edited:

Sorinth

Registered User
Jan 18, 2013
10,938
5,393
Am I the only one to find it perfectly normal that Danault rejected that contract?

Yeah he's probably not going to get a better contract as a UFA even if he turns around his play. But if instead of 30m he makes 20m over the next 6 years it's not going to materially change his life in any way. So it makes perfect sense that he'd care more about his role with the team going forward and his chances at winning the cup then he would about money. Both of those things are up in the air with MTL right now so it's perfectly logical for him to wait even if it costs him money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wats

Wats

Error 520
Mar 8, 2006
41,962
6,617
@Wats
He doesn't get PP time because he sucks offensively and can't produce anything. You think him playing 18min average last season and not being able to crack the powerplay is not obvious enough? lol.

Yeah I don't see the problem, he isn't being played over KK/Suzuki who are better offensively. He gets more PK and DZone defensive matchups because he is better defensively. He's not old, local (removes some media pressure to force acquire more), somewhat developed internally, best FO C by a mile, has some size/grind. Feel like people are forgetting how hard it actually is to develop C for the Habs. I'd be happy with Danault for 5 more years.

I rather KK continue getting sheltered ~60% ozone starts (this is Desharnais level). Until he is actually ready to take his game to another level.

Personally feel having the C-RW duos locked up makes roster deep and tougher to play against:

Suzuki - Anderson
Kotkaniemi - Toffoli
Danault - Gallagher

Perhaps Tatar can replace Perry/Armia on KK/Toffoli wing. That's only downside I see right now. Rather have Gallagher with Danault than the younger 2.
 

HabsWhiteKnightLOL

Registered User
Apr 29, 2017
34,191
45,262
Somewhere on earth in a hospital
Yeah I don't see the problem, he isn't being played over KK/Suzuki who are better offensively. He gets more PK and DZone defensive matchups because he is better defensively. He's not old, local (removes some media pressure to force acquire more), somewhat developed internally, best FO C by a mile, has some size/grind. Feel like people are forgetting how hard it actually is to develop C for the Habs. I'd be happy with Danault for 5 more years.

I rather KK continue getting sheltered ~60% ozone starts (this is Desharnais level). Until he is actually ready to take his game to another level.

Personally feel having the C-RW duos locked up makes roster deep and tougher to play against:

Suzuki - Anderson
Kotkaniemi - Toffoli
Danault - Gallagher

Perhaps Tatar can replace Perry/Armia on KK/Toffoli wing. That's only downside I see right now
Okay I get this , but what's the point of what we were talking about before
 

Wats

Error 520
Mar 8, 2006
41,962
6,617
Okay I get this , but what's the point of what we were talking about before

I was responding to someone saying you can't have successful teams with pricy 3rd C. Pointed out last 2 Cup winners had 5M 3rd Cs and they aren't exactly that much better/if at all than Danault IMO.
 

Mrb1p

PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
Dec 10, 2011
87,764
53,495
Citizen of the world
I was responding to someone saying you can't have successful teams with pricy 3rd C. Pointed out last 2 Cup winners had 5M 3rd Cs and they aren't exactly that much better/if at all than Danault IMO.
Its true, but look at both teams now, they lost a good bit of talent, do you think theyd rather have Bozak or Pietrangelo?
 

HabsWhiteKnightLOL

Registered User
Apr 29, 2017
34,191
45,262
Somewhere on earth in a hospital
I was responding to someone saying you can't have successful teams with pricy 3rd C. Pointed out last 2 Cup winners had 5M 3rd Cs and they aren't exactly that much better/if at all than Danault IMO.
At the same time they play third line duty but they can play pp and have a more offensive role. Points are not everything in terms of what of the income of the player has. As an exemple if Blues had an injury in the top 6 and Bozak was the third line center , he could end up replacing the player and has the pp time. Same goes for Johnson that he is playing on a heavy stacked team.

Danault with injury or not , he can't replace someone that produce offensively. Danault is not worth the 5m a season that he refused or even more. I agree that Danault if he was so stay would be a great benefits for us in th elong term. But a good price. I wouldn't mind signing Danault at the FA for 4-5years at 3.5m- 4m a season.

Habs should not anchor another contract with Danault with Price , Weber and Gallagher who cost enough already at long terms.

Also habs will need money to sign people with low contracts and try to find a new LHD in the future. Can't give money to everybody.

This team is doing great but if we did not play Vancouver 5 times this season im not so sure if he would be top 5 in the league right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Doc McKenna

canucklover123

Registered User
Oct 22, 2013
2,676
2,063
At the same time they play third line duty but they can play pp and have a more offensive role. Points are not everything in terms of what of the income of the player has. As an exemple if Blues had an injury in the top 6 and Bozak was the third line center , he could end up replacing the player and has the pp time. Same goes for Johnson that he is playing on a heavy stacked team.

Danault with injury or not , he can't replace someone that produce offensively. Danault is not worth the 5m a season that he refused or even more. I agree that Danault if he was so stay would be a great benefits for us in th elong term. But a good price. I wouldn't mind signing Danault at the FA for 4-5years at 3.5m- 4m a season.

Habs should not anchor another contract with Danault with Price , Weber and Gallagher who cost enough already at long terms.

Also habs will need money to sign people with low contracts and try to find a new LHD in the future. Can't give money to everybody.

This team is doing great but if we did not play Vancouver 5 times this season im not so sure if he would be top 5 in the league right now.

Well this seems like a contradiction. Bozak signed to a 5mil cap hit to play as the Blues third line C, if injuries were to happen, well ya he would move up into the top 6 and hopefully produce accordingly. Ironically, they won with a deep center squad which is what the OP emphasized.

Danault literally played top 6 minutes and "produced" offensively. I quotation produce because I am not sure what your context of produce is if Bozak played top 6 minutes in Toronto came off a 43P in 82 games season to sign to a 5 mil cap hit as a third line C and produce 38 in 72 and 29 in 67. If Philip Danault were to be used sparingly in the top 6 and in case of injuries, well he has shown under your context to "produce". Let's not go to the comparable of their d zone play..

TJ I do agree is better offensively than Danault even if his points don't show for it.

Alas, you expect to pay PD at tops a mil over what he originally signed? Nothing wrong with hoping and yes, we would be great if we got him at 4M, but let's not pretend that is happening
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wats

Doc McKenna

A new era 2021
Jan 5, 2009
11,812
11,733
@Bulis hit You don't think Tyler Bozak has more offense than danault?
From the last thread(i don't know how to quote from a different thread)
" Wow. Try harder.

Tyler Johnson is terrible for his contract and very average defensively for a few seasons now. Tyler freakin Bozak? This guy isn't more offensively skilled than Danault.

Danault is just having a slow start to this season. "



I see a guy that has 49 points in 58 games with 19 goals, I see a guy with five 40+ point seasons one of them 55. I see a player with only 5 out of 12 seasons with less goals than danaults career high of 13.
Many of his seasons have been cut short by injuries and his offensive numbers are still better than 82 game a year danault.

Bozak had 29 points (13 goals) playing on the 3rd line with 67 games last season. Do you think if danault goes from our top 2 in time usage of all forwards down to KKs 13 minutes a game that he gets over 29 points in 67 games, even with gally and tatar? Does he hit 30 point this season with his top minutes and linemates?

Bozak isn't a great offensive center, and yet he is still clearly better than danualt overall. Bozak is currently 34 years old and he had 29 points on the third line last year, danault is 27 with his 47 on the top line. Lets compare apples to apples. in 2013 when Bozak was 27 he had 49 points in 58 games- pro rated (since some like to do that for last season) is 69 points in am 82 game season.

Or how about when he was on pace for 50 in 2015 on a team filled with injuries and Kadri their #1 player at 45 points. Danault top year we had domi with 72 points and tatar with 58 drouin at 53, gally at 52 shaw at 47, think that is a better team than the leafs of the bozak era?

I said a number of time that Tyler Bozak wasn't a #1C same as danault(before the summer last year) but for the same reason the leafs used him as their number 1 because they had no other options available. Bozak is less d responsible than danault, but has better O skills. You can teach D awareness easier than O awareness..

Context is a valuable tool.

2009-10Toronto Maple LeafsNHL37819276-5----------
2009-10Toronto MarliesAHL32416206-8----------
2010-11Toronto Maple LeafsNHL8215173214-29----------
2011-12Toronto Maple LeafsNHL7318294722-7----------
2012-13Toronto Maple LeafsNHL461216286-151124
2013-14Toronto Maple LeafsNHL58193049142----------
2014-15Toronto Maple LeafsNHL8223264944-34----------
2015-16Toronto Maple LeafsNHL5712233518-9----------
2016-17Toronto Maple LeafsNHL7818375530-162244
2017-18Toronto Maple LeafsNHL8111324328672246
2018-19St. Louis BluesNHL7213253820-32658138
2019-20St. Louis BluesNHL6713162910080222
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
 
Last edited:

Wats

Error 520
Mar 8, 2006
41,962
6,617
Its true, but look at both teams now, they lost a good bit of talent, do you think theyd rather have Bozak or Pietrangelo?

I'm not sure that's accurate description of why they lost Pietrangelo. They signed Hoffman and Krug this offseason for a combined 10.5M cap hit. They traded for Faulk at 6.5M while having Pietrangelo and Paranko at RD, think they had a feeling he was going no matter what.
 

Doc McKenna

A new era 2021
Jan 5, 2009
11,812
11,733
@Wats
He doesn't get PP time because he sucks offensively and can't produce anything. You think him playing 18min average last season and not being able to crack the powerplay is not obvious enough? lol.

Zuki asked who in the team was a good PP player, last season ?
Him having that 90 seconds or so PP time last season may be part of why that PP wasn't all that good. He just isn't that creative with the puck. Hard working D specialist center. But that hardly constitutes 5 + contracts. Esp if he is continued to be used ahead of KK because as it stands he is getting the most icetime of our forwards not named suzuki even without PP time, and usually by several minutes, even above his own linemates, who do play on the PP.

If people want to talk about faceoff percentages and the need for danault, then why is Suzuki getting PK time, and end of game/period assignments with his dismal 40 or lower faceoff% KK is at 46% so on that basis he should have seen more faceoffs than suzuki. So no Danault good faceoff percentage isn't actually that important, just solid defensive play, hence suzuki taking critical faceoffs even if he isn't good at it.
 

Doc McKenna

A new era 2021
Jan 5, 2009
11,812
11,733
Give a long ass contract to Danault and we'll talk about him like they talked about Kyle Turris after his time with Ottawa.

I'm off the Danault train.
Or Price for the habs. I am not even thrilled about gallys contract. But at least TT's good contract is offsetting it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bsl and cphabs

canucklover123

Registered User
Oct 22, 2013
2,676
2,063
Zuki asked who in the team was a good PP player, last season ?
Him having that 90 seconds or so PP time last season may be part of why that PP wasn't all that good. He just isn't that creative with the puck. Hard working D specialist center. But that hardly constitutes 5 + contracts. Esp if he is continued to be used ahead of KK because as it stands he is getting the most icetime of our forwards not named suzuki even without PP time, and usually by several minutes, even above his own linemates, who do play on the PP.

If people want to talk about faceoff percentages and the need for danault, then why is Suzuki getting PK time, and end of game/period assignments with his dismal 40 or lower faceoff% KK is at 46% so on that basis he should have seen more faceoffs than suzuki. So no Danault good faceoff percentage isn't actually that important, just solid defensive play, hence suzuki taking critical faceoffs even if he isn't good at it.

Yup so this is just incorrect lol. You do realize he has more than "several minutes" of TOI because he plays PK, which you refused to include but somehow included PP time to further your biased point. Also, why are you using TOI and not average TOI lol.

Overall:
Danault 16:06
Tatar: 15:07
Gally: 15:02

At 5 on 5:
Danault Avg 12:59
Tatar: 12:50
Gallagher: 12:45

At PP:
Danault:0.21
Tatar: 2.12
Gally: 2.15

Yes, they play PP over him but he plays the most PK of any forward on the team currently, second evans.

Gally and TT have a combined AVG time on ice on the PK 0f 4 seconds. Danault AVG pk time is 2:44 lol

The habs have a PK to PP minute differential of 12 more minutes of PK than PP meaning 6 more penalties

Just using context you know
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->