Player Discussion Phillip Danault

[Mrb1p]

Even in the best games of Weal, ... if you want to compare Weal with Danault it's like comparing Mini-me with the Doctor Evil. And I love Weal some times !

Im not comparing Weal to Danault, not even close, Weal is an AHL player, but given playing time and top linemates, anyone will produce.

 

[Mrb1p]

no not at all actually. Being a good 5 on 5 line IS being a good line. I believe in roles. I believe the modern powerplay is not putting your best trio and two best D anymore. Its about chemistry for that specific task rather than keeping the same trios/duos. Its happening everywhere. we are not alone

Wait are you missing something here ?

People claim the Danault line is one of the best in the league.. What does that even mean ? To me, one of the best, means AT LEAST in the top 15, do you think they are one of the top 15 lines in the league ?

 

[Kriss E]

You are too soon. You think CJ should do what will happen in two or 3 years. Those kids are not ready yet. You see the Habs should do this because of some projection these kids will be in 2 or 3 years. Time travelling. You are too soon. We are not in 2021 yet.

I think that's such a silly assertion. Why do other teams do it but we can't? Why is Suzuki on the top 6 lines? He's more ready than KK who just came out of a very strong rookie year, especially given his age?..BS.
I'm all for letting kids get lower icetime/responsibilities as a rookie. I expect that to change as they come into their sophomore years. I'm not saying put KK as the #1 center, give him 20min of ice time, play him vs the Crosbys and McDavids, put him on the ice when we're defending the lead in our zone with a minute left, or if we're trailing with an empty net.
I'm saying give him better linemates and more offensive responsibilities.

What's going to happen in 3 years you think? We're going to use KK on the bottom lines for his first 3 years with low end talent guys/grinders with little offensive opportunities, and then you think he will magically be ready to play a top 2 role???
If you want someone to develop as a forward, you don't play him on defense. If you want someone to become a strong offensive player, well, you need to give him a lot of offensive opportunities. Pretty simple.
Is he ready to take on the full burden, nope, I agree, you can give that to Domi who's more ready, and you give him a secondary role. We are in a position where we don't really have to make the POs, might as well take advantage of that to live with the mistakes.

 

[THE HOFF]

Wait are you missing something here ?

People claim the Danault line is one of the best in the league.. What does that even mean ? To me, one of the best, means AT LEAST in the top 15, do you think they are one of the top 15 lines in the league ?

you completely ignored what I said but yeah easily top 10 in the league at even strength.

 

[Kriss E]

Youre selling Gallagher short, but whatever.

Also, "of course playing with X guy" helps is what Im going for. Put him with better players and he will produce more, this is it.

Darche was better playing with top 6 guys, doesn't mean we were leaving out his potential when we used him on the 4th. That's where he belong.
This ''playing with better players and he'll produce more'' applies to 99% of NHL players, even superstars. It ain't an argument mate.
End of the day, Gallagher has reached his top potential. He's a 30G-55pt guy.

 

[Kriss E]

you completely ignored what I said but yeah easily top 10 in the league at even strength.

But what does that mean in the end?...Because I'm pretty sure there's more than 10 lines out there I would happily swap for them.

 

[Catanddogguitarrr]

I think that's such a silly assertion. Why do other teams do it but we can't? Why is Suzuki on the top 6 lines? He's more ready than KK who just came out of a very strong rookie year, especially given his age?..BS.
I'm all for letting kids get lower icetime/responsibilities as a rookie. I expect that to change as they come into their sophomore years. I'm not saying put KK as the #1 center, give him 20min of ice time, play him vs the Crosbys and McDavids, put him on the ice when we're defending the lead in our zone with a minute left, or if we're trailing with an empty net.
I'm saying give him better linemates and more offensive responsibilities.

What's going to happen in 3 years you think? We're going to use KK on the bottom lines for his first 3 years with low end talent guys/grinders with little offensive opportunities, and then you think he will magically be ready to play a top 2 role???
If you want someone to develop as a forward, you don't play him on defense. If you want someone to become a strong offensive player, well, you need to give him a lot of offensive opportunities. Pretty simple.
Is he ready to take on the full burden, nope, I agree, you can give that to Domi who's more ready, and you give him a secondary role. We are in a position where we don't really have to make the POs, might as well take advantage of that to live with the mistakes.

But this is what KK is doing now. He learn playing nhl even with the linemate he have. Are we satisfy with the result in oct. 2019 ? Maybe not or half yes but time is on his side for KK, just wait. Playing 3rd line with Lek and Arnia or Byron is not bad. I would like to see KK with Tatar, this I would try, or put KK centering Tatar and Drouin. There could be Armia-Danault-Gallagher, and Poehling-Domi-Suzuki, it leaves a 4th line with Byron-Weal-Cousins, extra Thompson.

 

[Mrb1p]

you completely ignored what I said but yeah easily top 10 in the league at even strength.

Sorry I might have misunderstood.

Anyhow, yeah, thats a no from me man.

Drai-McDavid-a bag of pucks
Marchand-Bergeron-Pasta
Stamkos-Point-Kucherov
Guentzel-Crosby-A bag of cinnamon bun
Pacioretty-Statsny-Stone
Laine-Scheifele-Wheeler
Ovi-Backstrom-Oshie
Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm
Nino-Aho-Teravainen
Huberdeau-Barkov-Dadonov

Heres ten lines, ty come again.

Darche was better playing with top 6 guys, doesn't mean we were leaving out his potential when we used him on the 4th. That's where he belong.
This ''playing with better players and he'll produce more'' applies to 99% of NHL players, even superstars. It ain't an argument mate.
End of the day, Gallagher has reached his top potential. He's a 30G-55pt guy.

I don't get it

He's a 30g-55 pts guys right now because he plays with Danault and if he played with a better player he'd have better production, its exactly my point. No matter what you think Gallagher is, him putting up more goals and more assists gives him more value on the ice.

 

[THE HOFF]

But what does that mean in the end?...Because I'm pretty sure there's more than 10 lines out there I would happily swap for them.

well numbers don't lie. If you want your 1rst C to be the go to guy on the powerplay I guess I can see the issue here. as far as 5 on 5 play is concerned, they are a top line.

 

[THE HOFF]

Sorry I might have misunderstood.

Anyhow, yeah, thats a no from me man.

Drai-McDavid-a bag of pucks
Marchand-Bergeron-Pasta
Stamkos-Point-Kucherov
Guentzel-Crosby-A bag of cinnamon bun
Pacioretty-Statsny-Stone
Laine-Scheifele-Wheeler
Ovi-Backstrom-Oshie
Gaudreau-Monahan-Lindholm
Nino-Aho-Teravainen
Huberdeau-Barkov-Dadonov

Heres ten lines, ty come again.



I don't get it

He's a 30g-55 pts guys right now because he plays with Danault and if he played with a better player he'd have better production, its exactly my point. No matter what you think Gallagher is, him putting up more goals and more assists gives him more value on the ice.

5 on 5 there are 3 or 4 lines better in what you stated.

 

[Mrb1p]

5 on 5 there are 3 or 4 lines better in what you stated.

Which one ?

 

[Andrei79]

It's real nonsense for anybody here to be critical of Danault. We got him for nothing. He's our best faceoff man, best defensive forward, best penalty killer and a leader on the team. He's decent offensively. We got him for nothing.

This is a ridiculous argument.

Drafted players are gotten for nothing. So are FAs. Does this mean these players should be immune to criticism ?

He's middle 6 player played as the teams first line center. His possession numbers plummet when he's not playing with Tatar and Gallagher. What you'll actually notice is posters are being critical of his usage.

 

[Andrei79]

He is, but that doesnt make him the habs best 200 foot player.

Gallagher is much better offensively and drives the play more defensively.

Domi is miles and miles ahead offensively but worse defensively, how do you calculate that?

50 points playing 19 minutes a night with the teams best wingers is not something out of the ordinary, weve seen it happen over and over with subpar players. Think DD, Eller, Galchenyuk l, etc.

This is exactly it and why at some point using the term "200 foot player" for a player who doesn't produce enough loses its worth. Terms are give to put to light a players impact and in this case, you'd have to argue his defensive impact at the very least equals Domi's much greater offensive abilities, as well as his ability to drive a line (as Danaults numbers plummet anytime he's not with the best wingers).

 

[Kriss E]

well numbers don't lie. If you want your 1rst C to be the go to guy on the powerplay I guess I can see the issue here. as far as 5 on 5 play is concerned, they are a top line.

Numbers are numbers, what you conclude from them is what's more important.
Would you take them over MacKinnon's line? No. McDavid's? No. Crosby's? No. Malkin's? No. Stasny's? No. Point's? No. Scheifele's? No. Bergeron's? No. Backstrom's? No....
So...ya, great, they're one of the top 5 on 5 lines...Cool. What does that mean? Well nothing really other than they play well together, because you'd take a bunch of other lines over them without even thinking.

 

[Mrb1p]

Numbers are numbers, what you conclude from them is what's more important.
Would you take them over MacKinnon's line? No. McDavid's? No. Crosby's? No. Malkin's? No. Stasny's? No. Point's? No. Scheifele's? No. Bergeron's? No. Backstrom's? No....
So...ya, great, they're one of the top 5 on 5 lines...Cool. What does that mean? Well nothing really other than they play well together, because you'd take a bunch of other lines over them without even thinking.

Read up... he thinks theres only 3 or 4 lines that are better in the league...

 

[BaseballCoach]

ideally though, I’d like to see our centres in this order

Kotkaniemi
Poehling
Danault

That's two guys playing the Danault role. One is enough.

Right now, KK is 19 and is appropriately getting 3rd line usage. My goal, however, is to have two centres fulfilling their 60-80 point potential. That means NEITHER Danault nor Poehling centering a top-2 line.

The next step is for KK to move up to a second line role, behind Domi, with Danault being a "3rd line" counterpuncher. Doug Jarvis got lots of ice time, so did Guy Carbonneau. Danault could get 16-17 minutes even if his linemates such as Byron, Lehkonen get only 13-14 minutes.

But to toss aside our most productive center in many, many years to make room for Danault 2.0 (even if that's a slight version upgrade) does not look to me like the best use of talent.

Another approach if Caufield and Suzuki and Poehling all work out is to run three very good lines and maximize the chances on any given night of overwhelming the opponents' defences.

This could work beautifully:

1. Drouin-Domi-Suzuki
2. Poehling-Kotkaniemi-Caufield
3. Tatar/Byron-Danault-Gallagher
4. Lehkonen-Thompson/Evans-Armia

and Cousins, Weal spares

with Byron or possibly Tatar traded for legit NHL help elsewhere

 

[Kriss E]

But this is what KK is doing now. He learn playing nhl even with the linemate he have. Are we satisfy with the result in oct. 2019 ? Maybe not or half yes but time is on his side for KK, just wait. Playing 3rd line with Lek and Arnia or Byron is not bad. I would like to see KK with Tatar, this I would try, or put KK centering Tatar and Drouin. There could be Armia-Danault-Gallagher, and Poehling-Domi-Suzuki, it leaves a 4th line with Byron-Weal-Cousins, extra Thompson.

I'm not interested in doing what ''is not bad''. I'm looking for what is ideal. KK still being used on the 3rd-4th line with lower end players getting lesser offensive opportunities is not what I wanted for KK in year 2.
We're not going to turn Danault into some top end offensive center. The guy can put up some decent numbers if we give him those opportunities and linemates but we don't have to, we don't care to make the POs and we have other guys with way more potential we should focus on more.

Our top 6 should be comprised of Domi-KK-Suz-Drouin-Tatar-Gallagher. It's not that difficult. Mix and match.

 

[Kriss E]

I don't get it

He's a 30g-55 pts guys right now because he plays with Danault and if he played with a better player he'd have better production, its exactly my point. No matter what you think Gallagher is, him putting up more goals and more assists gives him more value on the ice.

No, he wouldn't put up better production with any ''better'' player. Just like Kessel only had one season in Pittsburgh where he outperformed his previous high production in Toronto, and we're talking about playing with one of the best centers in the league.
Gallagher isn't going from 30G-55pts to 38G-70pts playing next to Domi mate. There is a limit to potential. Gallagher I feel has reached his full potential. That's all there is to it.

There's always ways to manipulate production. Give him one of the absolute best center in the game, and then only send him out when the puck is in the offensive zone, play him 75s of every PP...chances are his production will rise. Obviously, but I don't consider that ''potential''. Heck, take Danault as an example. He's getting improved numbers thanks to his usage, but essentially, you think he's a top 9 player, a strong 3rd line center. Same idea with Gallagher.

 

[Mrb1p]

No, he wouldn't put up better production with any ''better'' player. Just like Kessel only had one season in Pittsburgh where he outperformed his previous high production in Toronto, and we're talking about playing with one of the best centers in the league.
Gallagher isn't going from 30G-55pts to 38G-70pts playing next to Domi mate. There is a limit to potential. Gallagher I feel has reached his full potential. That's all there is to it.

There's always ways to manipulate production. Give him one of the absolute best center in the game, and then only send him out when the puck is in the offensive zone, play him 75s of every PP...chances are his production will rise. Obviously, but I don't consider that ''potential''. Heck, take Danault as an example. He's getting improved numbers thanks to his usage, but essentially, you think he's a top 9 player, a strong 3rd line center. Same idea with Gallagher.

Kessel went from playong 17 minutes at ES to 14 minutes at ES with Pittsburgh...

Anyway weve discussed that before and it lead to nothing, so lets move on.

 

[Andrei79]

Numbers are numbers, what you conclude from them is what's more important.
Would you take them over MacKinnon's line? No. McDavid's? No. Crosby's? No. Malkin's? No. Stasny's? No. Point's? No. Scheifele's? No. Bergeron's? No. Backstrom's? No....
So...ya, great, they're one of the top 5 on 5 lines...Cool. What does that mean? Well nothing really other than they play well together, because you'd take a bunch of other lines over them without even thinking.

What you can conclude from it is that if they're a top 10 line, you could switch between all these lines and we wouldn't have been a playoff team last year with these other lines.


That's about the point where we all realize how comical that notion is.

 

[BaseballCoach]

What does best in the league mean ? Top 5 ? Top 10 ? TOP 30?

Not better than
The Bergeron line
The Stepan line
The Eichel line
The Monahan line
The Aho line
The Mackinnon line
The Larkin line
The McDavid line
The Barkov line
The RyJo line
The Couturier line
The Crosby line
The Hertl line
The Couture line
The Statsny line
The Karlsson line
The Schenn line
The ROR line
The Point line
The Tavares line
The Pettersson line
The Backstrom line
The Scheifele line
The Dubois line

Heck, is that line actually better than
The Little line ?
The Matthews line ?
The Barzal line ?
The Seguin line ?
The Horvat line?
The Kuznetslov line ?
The Johnson line ?
The Toews line ?
The Strome line ?
The Henrique line ?
The Duchene line in CBJ ?

Really, people should stop using that BS line shoved by MTL media because ITS NOT ONE OF THE BEST LINE IN THE LEAGUE.

I like your idea of challenging the statement like you did. Now, could you tell us who else was on each of those lines last year, so we can look at the 5-on-5 results and rank them?

 

[Sagikev]

I like your idea of challenging the statement like you did. Now, could you tell us who else was on each of those lines last year, so we can look at the 5-on-5 results and rank them?

The thing is, those lines bring alot at 5 on 5, but they're also beast on the PP. The Danault line aren't nearly as good on the PP. Sure, at 5v5 Danault's line is amongst the best, but hockey isn't only a 5v5 game.

 

[Habs Halifax]

The thing is, those lines bring alot at 5 on 5, but they're also beast on the PP. The Danault line aren't nearly as good on the PP. Sure, at 5v5 Danault's line is amongst the best, but hockey isn't only a 5v5 game.

Yes but where do they fall in terms of 5/5 play? If we have a better proven center than Danault, we would not be talking about this. But for now, we have to wait cause Domi is not an effective 200' center and Kotkaniemi and Poehling need time.

We all know Danault is not a PP guy. But where does that line fall 5/5? Correct me if I am wrong but isn't that the conversation?

I think the big question is when do we put trust into Kotkaniemi being one of our top 2C's and move Danault to the 3C role as a shutdown line primarily (Lehkonen / Danault / Armia for example). Is it now or next year or the year after? Some say now, some say later.

 

[Sagikev]

Yes but where do they fall in terms of 5/5 play? If we have a better proven center than Danault, we would not be talking about this. But for now, we have to wait cause Domi is not an effective 200' center and Kotkaniemi and Poehling need time.

We all know Danault is not a PP guy. But where does that line fall 5/5? Correct me if I am wrong but isn't that the conversation?

I think the big question is when do we put trust into Kotkaniemi being one of our top 2C's and move Danault to the 3C role as a shutdown line primarily (Lehkonen / Danault / Armia for example). Is it now or next year or the year after? Some say now, some say later.

KK needs more time, especially on the PP, we all agree on that. The thing is, Julien is adamant on rolling 4 lines (and overabusig Danault). Sure he's good, but I agree to an extent with @Mrb1p that gally drives the line defensively : I'd try Domi with Gally and Tatar. Domi is an intelligent enough player to learn on the fly about the defensive side of being a center. Playing with Gally does that too IMO. That could give us a really solid offensive line. Danault with Lehk and Armia, elite defensively and can chip in offensively. Drouin KK Suzuki, could turn out to be a really good line offensively, KK and Suz can do the job defensively, but I wonder about their consistency. Anyway, I think we can all agree CJ is misusing his assets right now, although it's not terrible (it could be worse).

 

[Habs Halifax]

KK needs more time, especially on the PP, we all agree on that. The thing is, Julien is adamant on rolling 4 lines (and overabusig Danault). Sure he's good, but I agree to an extent with @Mrb1p that gally drives the line defensively : I'd try Domi with Gally and Tatar. Domi is an intelligent enough player to learn on the fly about the defensive side of being a center. Playing with Gally does that too IMO. That could give us a really solid offensive line. Danault with Lehk and Armia, elite defensively and can chip in offensively. Drouin KK Suzuki, could turn out to be a really good line offensively, KK and Suz can do the job defensively, but I wonder about their consistency. Anyway, I think we can all agree CJ is misusing his assets right now, although it's not terrible (it could be worse).

So Julien is sheltering Danault's defensive side with Gallagher? Do you think Gallagher can shelter Kotkaniemi or Domi and get the same 5/5 results? Danault is a perfect middle 2C IMO and he does a lot out there. I'm open to shuffling up the lines but not desperate for it to happen until Kotkaniemi can be a more effective top 2C. We have to remain patient unfortunately while both Kotkaniemi and Domi mature as centers. When Poehling is ready, Domi is moved to his wing IMO. When Kotkaniemi is ready, Danault moves to 3C. I'm ok with this

We have to remember management's goal is to make the playoffs. They don't see it like how some fans do where we want to let the kids have important roles while they make mistakes on the job. Considering the circumstance of what management wants, it makes sense on what they are trying at the moment. We are not a 100% rebuilding team.