Discussion in 'Montreal Canadiens' started by Belial, Jun 20, 2019.
Big fan of Petry too, as it happens
Big fan of players that cost the team because theyre horrible in their own way, I see.
That must be it
I hate those players. Theyre profoudly dumb and on the surface they do a good job, but its not even close to being adequate. At one point, theyre anchors for the team.
Petry does so many defensive mistakes because hes a dumb, dumb player.
Danault does nothing but bring down his line offensively. The amount of time his play is directly responsible for a loss of offensive possession should drive any fan crazy. Funny because Eller had a huge backlash from fans because he did just that, give away pucks over pucks over pucks. At least Eller wasnt strapped to the teams two best winger.
If Danault brings his line down offensively, why doesn't he bring his line down offensively? His team owns 59% of goals, shots, scoring chances
I agree he shouldn't be near a powerplay, but you can't find 5 lines in the NHL with better results than Tatar-Danault-Gallagher at even strength. For 3.1M and 14 mins/game at ES, there's incredible value there
What if thats just a result of playing with Gallagher and Tatar? What if the Habs actually had a competent top 6 center in there? Its also skewed because Danault is great at transition play, hes even elite at bringing the puck up ice, like Lars was. Its in the zone, when he has the play that it gets bad, where every single top 6 center thrives.
Thats mainly why looking at numbers to form an opinion can be so confusing. At ES, Danault drives the play up, a really valuable asset to have, like Eller, but a player that actually brings diminishing return once hes bumped up in the line up.
Honestly it takes about one game of critical evaluation to realize that and Im dumb founded that theres not more people talking about that.
Gallagher is absolutely the driver, and would be the driver no matter who the centre is. It's not a coincidence that whoever has played with Gallagher has seen a bump. Facts are that 59% is otherworldly, and if you can get those kind of results from a line centered by Danault, you take them. You could put a better player there, and the results still wouldn't be as good. He just fits
You don't put Max Domi on a line that's gonna be driven by Gallagher. It's a waste of both of their abilities. Give me 30 minute of Gallagher OR Domi rather than 15 minutes of Gallagher AND Domi
Danault is a passenger, but he's a good passenger. There is value in that. He's familiar with the area, he pays for road coffees, he can change a tire, he doesn't get in the way, he pitches in on gas, he makes 3.1 for 2 more years. There is like twelve other guys I'd complain about before him
Thing is though, Tatar has never been as successful as he has been since paired with Denault, Gallagher has never had the same success either. Possession wise, Gallagher might be the driver but Denault is the engine. Together they have been what has been successful, they had better possession/ goal differential stats than all but the Boston top line (though in some ways they were even better).
Denault makes the players around him better, he's solid defensively and yeah.
We've all watched him play, seems your the only one who's come to your conclusion.
I actually saw something else. Notice how once he started getting power play minutes later in the season how the power play got a lot better? That's no accident.
This is hilarious. Guess Gallagher would be a Marchand level producer and tatar would be a 40+ goal-scorer if they hadn't been saddled with Danault?
Tatar is what he is, but Gallagher would be much more than a sub 20 assist player and a mere 30 goal forward. Yes.
I think you misunderstand Gallagher's impact. He will never be a Marchand-like producer. 30-40 goals and around 20- 25 assists is the maximum he will put up in points, IMO, in a career year, but his impact will always be far more reaching than his actual points.
How do you know? Hes been that all his career and hes never played with a single top 6 center.
once his contracts up, would you give him anymore than 3.1mil for his lines 59%?
he's good at what he does but you shouldnt slot him higher than the 3rd line, moving to 2nd when required
if all our rookies pan out, unfortunately i think Danault is the odd man out
I would absolutely not re-sign a 28 year old Phil Danault
Role players should be jettisoned come contract time at that age, Danault is no exception
agreed but not sure about management.
Well at least thats something we can agree on.
It's funny how it's points/goals/shots per game, yet when it comes to ice time it's no longer per game but total. Not too mention it would make more sense to loos at ES points/goals/shots.
Who would've been better anyway? Like someone said, you need to keep Domi and Gally separated. KK wasn't ready for more ice time versus better players. He hit a wall in the 2nd half. Danault was the only option and he performed well. Hopefully he can repeat his season. I think KK needs another year before becomig the first line C.
He had a rough patch and that's when Clod started the coaching. KK was promptly marked as someone who needs to become a better person and was shafted to the bottom of the depth chart. At 18, it's hard not to think that his confidence took a hit further affecting his play. I would argue that a different (better) coach would have helped him through the rough stretch and we wouldn't be talking about hitting any walls.
Only in MTL do we delay our franchise 1C talent to catter to 3Cs from la belle province.
Putting KK in a position where he can succeed, develop AND contribute and not get totally dominated is the most important thing for his confidence and his game. He should not have to have more pressure on his shoulders than he has at this point in time. When he's ready to take more, you give more. It has nothing to do with playing anybody over anybody and it has nothing to do with Danault. But I guess throwing a line out there that basically implies racial bias trumps talent is much more fun. Its quite dumb, though. By projecting it to the habs, you let us know exactly where you stand.
Oh yeah every single young star does it, but not in MTL. In MTL theyre tired even though thats scientifically improbable. In Montreal he needs to learn to be good defensively. In Montreal he needs to earn it. In Montreal hes not a good enough person. In Montreal he just didnt fit with the identity. In Montreal he had a partying problem.
Keep drinking the Koolaid. 27 years and counting.
Stanley Cup contenders need good role players. Now, at over $5M, he might cost too much, but if he can get $5M on the open market from a team whose fans speak English, then maybe the critics will finally shut up.
KK was the youngest player in the league last year. You do realize, again, how dumb your comments are? THE YOUNGEST.
I can tell coaching is not your forte, but I expected more decency out of you.
Separate names with a comma.