Player Discussion Phillip Danault

[ZUKI]

Trade him while his value is still high and we arent saddled with a 6 million dollar 3rd line center.

Why not trade all the good players of the team while their value are high ?

 

[NobleSix]

Why not trade all the good players of the team while their value are high ?

Because 'all the good players' arent 3rd line centers punching above their weight, while on the cusp of likely demanding a large overpayment on their next contract.

His value is likely at an all time high for what he is, we have a 70 point center, a top 3 pick that will almost certainly be a top 6 C, and a plethora of prospects that will likely be challenging for that 3C spot relatively soon.

This team needs a few upgrades throughout the lineup, and if Danault is honestly going to command 5-6 million dollars a year, he's right at the top of the list of players that I'd trade to address those holes.

 

[Mrb1p]

Because 'all the good players' arent 3rd line centers punching above their weight, while on the cusp of likely demanding a large overpayment on their next contract.

His value is likely at an all time high for what he is, we have a 70 point center, a top 3 pick that will almost certainly be a top 6 C, and a plethora of prospects that will likely be challenging for that 3C spot relatively soon.

This team needs a few upgrades throughout the lineup, and if Danault is honestly going to command 5-6 million dollars a year, he's right at the top of the list of players that I'd trade to address those holes.

Jeez thats music to my hears. Such a great, great sentence.

 

[japhi]

Not sure you get to be sarcastically smug when you call 17:47 3C minutes. How many minutes do you think are in a game?

Jesus guys, words matter. I said he is UTILIZED closer to 3c then a 1c. And I supported that with the fact that he plays 17.5, not 19 like the one guy is claiming. And he kills penalties and plays shut down. Starts much more in the D zone then the o zone and gets little time on PP. Sound like a 1C? Of course not.

He WILL get paid, because he is a very valuable player, not because he is getting easy 1C minutes. Domi was very clearly used as our 1C.

 

[ZUKI]

Because 'all the good players' arent 3rd line centers punching above their weight, while on the cusp of likely demanding a large overpayment on their next contract.

His value is likely at an all time high for what he is, we have a 70 point center, a top 3 pick that will almost certainly be a top 6 C, and a plethora of prospects that will likely be challenging for that 3C spot relatively soon.

This team needs a few upgrades throughout the lineup, and if Danault is honestly going to command 5-6 million dollars a year, he's right at the top of the list of players that I'd trade to address those holes.

" ... on the cusp of likely demanding a large overpayment on their next contract."

really ?

 

[ZUKI]

Jeez thats music to my hears. Such a great, great sentence.

great assumption based on nothing, you mean ?

 

[The Real Timo]

Jeez thats music to my hears. Such a great, great sentence.

He is d'chez nous... i totally see Bergevin throwing stupid amount of cash at him. I mean I generally don't mind Danno he is ok as a 2 million 3rd line center... anything above that is overpayment. His productions during the last stretch of the last season seemed to have been slightly above Drouin's. He hard was a driving force of any kind. Yawn... I really hope they don't screw up Kotkaniemi.

 

[Mrb1p]

great assumption based on nothing, you mean ?

Based on logic

 

[Andrei79]

Hurrah for gish gallop of nonsense!!!! Lets break it down.

"Nielsen WAS like Danault, he WON'T be on a contender" past tense, then present tense. He would have been a fine 2C when he was good, he wouldn't now that he's not good. Congrats on that one.

Stressing that they both "barely" set care career bests... cool... still career bests. Top 6 wingers don't set career bests playing with a 3C.

His wingers weren't scoring ES goals? 29/33 for Gally, 21/25 for Tatar. 50/58 total seems like a lot...

32nd isn't 1C numbers? No one said he was a 1C, we are saying he is a quality top 6 C and 32nd is quality top 6 numbers, especially at C. 45th overall doesn't matter as he barely played on the PP. Your claim that 32nd is middle six is embarrassing.

Secondary assists? Cool. Get back to me when that means something.

His corsi goes down when he's not playing with them? Considering they played together all year that must be some quality sample size. Probably when he goes in without them as a second C for D zone draws and shutdown situations. You know, situations where you expect a bad corsi?

What could be at play here? You planted your flag 2 years ago when he was out of his element playing with Rads and Patch and now refuse to admit he has improved with experience? Couldn't be.

Your problem here is you didn't understand half of my post, so obviously you'll be arguing the wrong things.

I'm comparing current Danault to what Nielsen was. Obviously not current Nielsen. Like, how could you come up with that conclusion ? Nielsen was a very good player who even Islanders fans would have rather have seen as third line C. A guy who can step up if need be.

Gallagher was scoring in bunches with Tomas Plekanec last year, who was barely an NHLer at that point. So there goes that theory about not being able to score with a third line C. You know that when I said they weren't scoring ES, I was being sarcastic, right ? Both Tatar and Gallagher have always been great ES goal scorers. Unsurprisingly, they were great ES goal scorers again. Unsurprisingly, they had a career year in a year when multiple players did, even on this team, because scoring was up significantly.

Now, imagine putting a player in the middle of two great ES goal scoring centers who, from possession stats, drive the play whatever players they're with (hint: yes, those were significant minutes). Hey, it's almost like you could see that center leech off their offensive plays and rack up secondary assists. Which Danault did, at the highest rate of anyone on the team.

Now, let's look at that 32nd ES production bullshit and adress it once and for all. A significant part of it is driven to start with by Danault racking secondary assists on the back of better offensive players. We know he's not a top line center, we both agree with that - the production just doesn't back it up. So, what remains is 2nd line down. However, he's not getting 2nd line ice time. He was getting the most ES ice time of any forward on the team. He was getting more ES ice time than guys like Stamkos. With the teams two best wingers. Yet, he was no where near the top of the line in ES production on one of the best teams 5 on 5, while the other top 6 center on the team significantly outproduced him in ES with weaker wingers.

Hey, it's almost like that production was inflated. Because it was. He's a good player. It was fine to have him as our 2nd line center last year, but let's not make him into more than he is. He's a top 6 only in the sense that he's no where near a 1st line center, but can play on the 2nd and would be ideal on the 3rd. A guy who shouldn't play on the 1st, would do fine on the 2nd and great on 3rd... hmmm sounds like a middle 6 player. Giving him offensive opportunities over Kotkaniemi and Poehling will set this team back in the future.

 

[ZUKI]

Jesus guys, words matter. I said he is UTILIZED closer to 3c then a 1c. And I supported that with the fact that he plays 17.5, not 19 like the one guy is claiming. And he kills penalties and plays shut down. Starts much more in the D zone then the o zone and gets little time on PP. Sound like a 1C? Of course not.

He WILL get paid, because he is a very valuable player, not because he is getting easy 1C minutes. Domi was very clearly used as our 1C.

The concept of the "1st , 2nd and 3rd liners" is such a poor and simplistic way to explain the nature of the game. Danault, Gallagher and Tatar are playing a lot of minutes because they are there to contain the best opposite lines and to outscore them .Something the are doing very well .

 

[Sorinth]

Yeah, why shoud I be comparing Danault to his comparables ? I really should be re-evaluating something here . Nielsen was what Danault is and what you won't be finding on the top 6 of teams with cup aspirations.

How many teams with cup aspirations have a 2nd line center playing as their 2nd line center? Virtually all teams with cup aspirations will have two first line centers. So the fact that Danault or Nielsen wouldn't be 2nd line centers on a contending team doesn't mean they aren't/weren't 2nd line centers.

 

[Archijerej]

His value is likely at an all time high for what he is, we have a 70 point center, a top 3 pick that will almost certainly be a top 6 C, and a plethora of prospects that will likely be challenging for that 3C spot relatively soon.

What if this "70 point center" is punching above his weight, which wouldn't be surprising, considering his resume thus far? What if Kotkaniemi's value is at an all time high, because people see a potential #1 center and he turns out not to be one? What if our prospects follow the path of so many other prospects we held in high regard, wouldn't it set their value as an all time high right now and diminishing in the future? Should we trade them all?

 

[ECWHSWI]

Many legit Top-6 center don't get both at the same time in their career, so I don't know why there's a problem with Danault having done this (only) once.

problem ???

 

[ECWHSWI]

He had 40 points two years ago in his first full season as a centre, the next year he was on pace for 40 again on an absolute tirefire of a team.

This season he was 32nd in the league among centres for even strength points. Over 50 points with very little PP time (worst PP in franchise history anyway). 7th in Selke voting. PDO was 99.8 so its not like we should expect some huge regression. Its just a case of us going to a more aggressive possession system that he can thrive in, combined with linemates that he has a lot of chemistry with. I don't see a big jump for him next year, but I do expect more of the same.

same here, he'll probably have the same linemates and more or less same TOI so...

but more ? not really, you described his progression already, and since it's rarely linear well...

 

[ECWHSWI]

Not true, there, for your education : Pas question d'utiliser Phillip Danault en avantage numérique | Mathias Brunet | Hockey

did you read the article ?

 

[Guns n Roses]

Danault + Julien combo is our Achilles heal.

Kotka and Poehling will never play above him no matter how much better they are.

 

[Mrb1p]

What if this "70 point center" is punching above his weight, which wouldn't be surprising, considering his resume thus far? What if Kotkaniemi's value is at an all time high, because people see a potential #1 center and he turns out not to be one? What if our prospects follow the path of so many other prospects we held in high regard, wouldn't it set their value as an all time high right now and diminishing in the future? Should we trade them all?

The only way KK isnt a 1C is if we keep stunting his development

 

[Archijerej]

The only way KK isnt a 1C is if we keep stunting his development

Yeah, yeah, sure.

 

[Guns n Roses]

The only way KK isnt a 1C is if we keep stunting his development

With the Danault and Julien combo, no player will ever reach 1C status, because of “Danault’s feelings” and Julien’s “Mental Shortcomings”

 

[CH4]

Danault + Julien combo is our Achilles heal.

Kotka and Poehling will never play above him no matter how much better they are.

So you want kk and poeling to take all the defensive assignments, play against other teams top lines, dzone starts, play first pk and no pp?

Players like danault helps taking the heat out of our best offensive players, without being blackhole offensively.

 

[Mrb1p]

So you want kk and poeling to take all the defensive assignments, play against other teams top lines, dzone starts, play first pk and no pp?

Players like danault helps taking the heat out of our best offensive players, without being blackhole offensively.

Can you explain why Barzal could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi ?
Can you explain why Pettersson could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Hischier could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Aho could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Toews could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Bergeron could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Monahan could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why PLD could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Larkin could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Barkov could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Draisaitl could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Kopitar could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Johansen could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Scheifele could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Backstrom could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Kuznetsov could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?

And I'd really like an answer, from anyone who thinks that Kotkaniemi would be in over his head in a top 6. I'd really like to know why it works EVERYWHERE ELSE but not in Montreal.

 

[CH4]

Because kotkaniemi was 18 last year, most if not all of them didn’t play 20 minutes being the youngest player in the nhl.

We’ll see next year how many minutes he will play.

 

[angusyoung]

Can you explain why Barzal could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi ?
Can you explain why Pettersson could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Hischier could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Aho could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Toews could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Bergeron could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Monahan could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why PLD could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Larkin could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Barkov could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Draisaitl could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Kopitar could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Johansen could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Scheifele could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Backstrom could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?
Can you explain why Kuznetsov could play 20 minutes a night at 19 and not Kotkaniemi?

And I'd really like an answer, from anyone who thinks that Kotkaniemi would be in over his head in a top 6. I'd really like to know why it works EVERYWHERE ELSE but not in Montreal.

Can't speak on behalf of all the other teams,but in Montreal,they have 2 centers that at this point more sound defensively than KK.

 

[CH4]

Great examples, many didn’t even play in the nhl at 18, you are complaining on events that haven’t even happened yet. You have no clue what utilisation kk will have this year. Danault is a good two way 2c and should be utilised so

 

[WatchfulElm]

My god, the Desharnais haters have found a new scapegoat... Danault in the role of DD, and KK in the role of Eller as the victim of a French Canadian center who's getting too much icetime.

Funny how these are exactly the same posters as 5 years ago. There's a funny trend here...