Prediction: Will Danault ever hit 60 points in a season?

[Rapala]

Exactly one.

HAHAHAHAHA
I know I looked it up too after the fact.

 

[PaulD]

He will absolutely reach 60 pts if he does what every damn 60 pts scorer in this league does, which is playing on the man advantage.

Even DD did it.

 

[Kriss E]

????

St Louis was not much different last year.

2/3 of Chicago’s cups had Toews at around 70 points.
Kopitar led with 70 in one of their Cup years.

70 + 55 has been enough for a Cup on several occasions. Not sure what this ‘once a decade’ talk is all about.

To be fair, those guys produced a whole lot more in the POs. Toews and Kane were well above 1ppg their first cup, and around 1ppg for pretty much the rest.
Even guys like Bergeron, Marchand, O'Reilly, Schwartz...guys elevated their games in the POs and produced at a higher pace.

So ya, you can win without huge superstars so long as whoever is leading your team steps up to produce like one during the POs.

You really have to go back to the Devils winning in 02-03 if you want to point to a team who won producing little and without much star power. Langenbrunner was their top scorer with 18pts during that run.
But...they had arguably one of the best goalies of all time and played a style of hockey they flourished in. They're an exception, mimicking them is likely to fail.

 

[Rapala]

....

To be fair, those guys produced a whole lot more in the POs. Toews and Kane were well above 1ppg their first cup, and around 1ppg for pretty much the rest.
Even guys like Bergeron, Marchand, O'Reilly, Schwartz...guys elevated their games in the POs and produced at a higher pace.

So ya, you can win without huge superstars so long as whoever is leading your team steps up to produce like one during the POs.

You really have to go back to the Devils winning in 02-03 if you want to point to a team who won producing little and without much star power. Langenbrunner was their top scorer with 18pts during that run.
But...they had arguably one of the best goalies of all time and played a style of hockey they flourished in. They're an exception, mimicking them is likely to fail.

That was the year the Madden line did what the Paulsen line did for The Ducks when they won.

 

[LaP]

Even DD did it.

There's many players in this league who can occasionally hit 60 points if you give them plenty of TOI with quality players. Whatever you can win while giving them this TOI is another story though. A completely different one.

 

[Rapala]

There's many players in this league who can occasionally hit 60 points if you give them plenty of TOI with quality players. Whatever you can win while giving them this TOI is another story though. A completely different one.

This is the underlying theme to the whole Danault discussion. What needs to be done to optimize his production while ensuring he has the stamina for the end game. He isn't exactly a horse. Neither was Plek truth be told.

 

[LaP]

To be fair, those guys produced a whole lot more in the POs. Toews and Kane were well above 1ppg their first cup, and around 1ppg for pretty much the rest.
Even guys like Bergeron, Marchand, O'Reilly, Schwartz...guys elevated their games in the POs and produced at a higher pace.

So ya, you can win without huge superstars so long as whoever is leading your team steps up to produce like one during the POs.

You really have to go back to the Devils winning in 02-03 if you want to point to a team who won producing little and without much star power. Langenbrunner was their top scorer with 18pts during that run.
But...they had arguably one of the best goalies of all time and played a style of hockey they flourished in. They're an exception, mimicking them is likely to fail.

They also had one of the best defense of modern hockey.

 

[BaseballCoach]

There's many players in this league who can occasionally hit 60 points if you give them plenty of TOI with quality players. Whatever you can win while giving them this TOI is another story though. A completely different one.

I see the excuses being prepared already. "yeah, he got 65 points, but it's only because he was gifted PP time".

 

[Kriss E]

They also had one of the best defense of modern hockey.

Ya..having Nieds-Rafalski-Stevens probably helped a bit..

 

[LaP]

This is the underlying theme to the whole Danault discussion. What needs to be done to optimize his production while ensuring he has the stamina for the end game. He isn't exactly a horse. Neither was Plek truth be told.

It's simple having six real top 6 talents. But we will never have that if we always say our guys are good enough we can't replace them once a kid develop into a legitimate top talent. I mean if we can find 5 top players to surround Danault then yeah so be it. If he is our worst top 6 player we have a damn good team. But we should not be picky like that. If two of Kotkaniemi, Poehling and Suzuki are natural center and better than Danault then they should play center. Our top 6 is simply not good enough and nobody should be a lock.

 

[LaP]

I see the excuses being prepared already. "yeah, he got 65 points, but it's only because he was gifted PP time".

Absolutely not. If in 10 years he has five or six 60+ seasons then there's no excuse he is a top center in the league. But if he has one or two with some 40 points seasons in between like Plekanec had then he was simply gifted too much TOI.

 

[Ozmodiar]

To be fair, those guys produced a whole lot more in the POs. Toews and Kane were well above 1ppg their first cup, and around 1ppg for pretty much the rest.
Even guys like Bergeron, Marchand, O'Reilly, Schwartz...guys elevated their games in the POs and produced at a higher pace.

So ya, you can win without huge superstars so long as whoever is leading your team steps up to produce like one during the POs.

You really have to go back to the Devils winning in 02-03 if you want to point to a team who won producing little and without much star power. Langenbrunner was their top scorer with 18pts during that run.
But...they had arguably one of the best goalies of all time and played a style of hockey they flourished in. They're an exception, mimicking them is likely to fail.

Just discussing centers here. Of course teams need support from the other positions ... from guys like Kane, Marchand.

The centers, no doubt, certainly have to elevate their play in the playoffs to in the Cup. Same thing for players at other key positions. Cup winning goalies play at a Vezina level, at least one D plays like a Norris winner, etc.

The point is, if you build a strong team around 2 solid 2-way centers (70 + 55 pts), who don't present match-up issues (a-la-DD), it can be enough to win.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Absolutely not. If in 10 years he has five or six 60+ seasons then there's no excuse he is a top center in the league. But if he has one or two with some 40 points seasons in between like Plekanec had then he was simply gifted too much TOI.

If Danault continues to score 0.5ppg at ES, then he is clearly a 2C even though he speaks English with an accent.

 

[BaseballCoach]

Just discussing centers here. Of course teams need support from the other positions ... from guys like Kane, Marchand.

The centers, no doubt, certainly have to elevate their play in the playoffs to in the Cup. Same thing for players at other key positions. Cup winning goalies play at a Vezina level, at least one D plays like a Norris winner, etc.

The point is, if you build a strong team around 2 solid 2-way centers (70 + 55 pts), who don't present match-up issues (a-la-DD), it can be enough to win.

And if KK progresses further in the next two years, then we could have a 70+ point C, a 60+ point C, and a 3rd line center who gets us 45 points due to less opportunity but who can get 55 and be 2C if there is an injury. Add Poehling, Suzuki and Caufield on the wings and that is quite a young and potent offence.

 

[Kriss E]

Just discussing centers here. Of course teams need support from the other positions ... from guys like Kane, Marchand.

The centers, no doubt, certainly have to elevate their play in the playoffs to in the Cup. Same thing for players at other key positions. Cup winning goalies play at a Vezina level, at least one D plays like a Norris winner, etc.

The point is, if you build a strong team around 2 solid 2-way centers (70 + 55 pts), who don't present match-up issues (a-la-DD), it can be enough to win.

It can...but it's unlikely, and again, those centers will have to step up their production come PO time.
It's important to paint a full picture, just pointing at the top 2 centers doesn't give you a good indication of the team at all.
Like I said, point to the Devils winning the cup with Madden at their top center scoring 16pts, but then, it's pretty important to mention their top 3 D, Nieds-Rafalski-Stevens + HoF goalie Brodeur + tailor-made trap system.

Hawks won with Handzus as their #2 center when he scored 8pts in 39gp during the season. So ya, you can win the cup with a lot of different things happening. But then you need to look at the rest to consider just how likely these wins happen.
Of course we could win with Domi-Danault as our centers, assuming Price-Weber-Gallagher-Tatar-KK all raise their games to much higher levels, then sure...maybe we could win too.
Likeliness of that happening in my book....slim to none.

 

[BaseballCoach]

It's simple having six real top 6 talents. But we will never have that if we always say our guys are good enough we can't replace them once a kid develop into a legitimate top talent. I mean if we can find 5 top players to surround Danault then yeah so be it. If he is our worst top 6 player we have a damn good team. But we should not be picky like that. If two of Kotkaniemi, Poehling and Suzuki are natural center and better than Danault then they should play center. Our top 6 is simply not good enough and nobody should be a lock.

Just amass talent, talent, talent.

Trade Drouin for help on D.

In two years:

Poehling-Kotkaniemi-Caufield
Tatar-Domi-Suzuki
Lehkonen/Byron-Danault-Gallagher
Byron/Lehkonen-Evans-Armia

 

[Ozmodiar]

Mid fifties with no PP time, linemates who aren't actually top linemates (there's no OV, Kane, Kucherov or even Pasternak on this team : Gallagher is underrated and a legit first line player, but Tomas Tatar is pretty much a stereotypical second liner) while receiving tough deployments, and no "real" first minutes (Montreal top lines tend to play a bit less than other teams top lines)

That's actually REALLY good.

Which doesn't mean that there won't be players who will be better options in this role (as they gain experience).

Under 50 without the PP points.

Danault's a good hockey player, but you can bet the Habs want more out of their center with the most TOI and best line mates.

 

[PaulD]

There's many players in this league who can occasionally hit 60 points if you give them plenty of TOI with quality players. Whatever you can win while giving them this TOI is another story though. A completely different one.

Exactly

 

[Rapala]

If Danault continues to score 0.5ppg at ES, then he is clearly a 2C even though he speaks English with an accent.

Sure but we will be deploying him as 1C again this year. How much TOI is he going to get? Toughest match ups 1st wave PK assignments 1st wave PP assignments all with a sneaking suspicion that he'll get run down like he did last year. I like ptit Jesu but he isn't a horse like I pointed out earlier. I doubt he can handle all of the above and remain productive throughout.

 

[Ozmodiar]

just pointing at the top 2 centers doesn't give you a good indication of the team at all.

of course it doesn't. it wasn't meant to. it goes without saying that looking at a singular position doesn't give a clear picture of the team as a whole.

the question is: if you have a reliable (2-way) pair of centers (70, 55 pts), can you build around it? This is the question the Habs have to answer, considering they might not have an elite center in their ranks.

I think they can build around what they have, but an elite piece is still needed - possibly at LD. I don't see Mete logging big minutes in the PO's.

 

[Kriss E]

of course it doesn't. it wasn't meant to. it goes without saying that looking at a singular position doesn't give a clear picture of the team as a whole.

the question is: if you have a reliable (2-way) pair of centers (70, 55 pts), can you build around it? This is the question the Habs have to answer, considering they might not have an elite center in their ranks.

I think they can build around what they have, but an elite piece is still needed - possibly at LD. I don't see Mete logging big minutes in the PO's.

I don't think it's that simple though, otherwise of course the answer is yes. Can you build around Krejci - Bergeron? Hell yes. O'Reilly - Schenn? Well, that worked for them but they still need Bozak to contribute.
Can you build around Domi-Danault...well that's very unclear at the moment. As of today, I'm not confident those two will become another type of Krejci - Bergeron.

I don't think we can build a serious winner with those two leading the charge and Tatar-Gallagher as our best wingers. If that changes with some of our prospects, we'll see, but that means both those guys need to keep perform as they have last year and not regress either.
That's only looking up front too, on the back end, as you mentioned, Mete ain't got business on the top pair imo.

So ya, if all you ask is can you win with two centers going 70 - 55pts, sure, looking at the rest of our team though, we're nowhere ready to have the proper support cast in order to win with those centers.

 

[Ozmodiar]

As of today, I'm not confident those two will become another type of Krejci - Bergeron.

Neither am I. The question is more likely: can Suzuki and KK do it, or should the Habs still be on the hunt for a "#1 center"?
I'm more confident in the latter, with an excellent 3rd in Danault or Poehling. If the Habs feel the same way, they can zero in on the supporting cast which needs work, esp on D.

 

[Kriss E]

Neither am I. The question is more likely: can Suzuki and KK do it, or should the Habs still be on the hunt for a "#1 center"?
I'm more confident in the latter, with an excellent 3rd in Danault or Poehling. If the Habs feel the same way, they can zero in on the supporting cast which needs work, esp on D.

You can never have too many #1 centers. If there's one available, it's always worth looking into.
Suz-KK...too early to know how good they'll be.

 

[teamfirst]

Sure but we will be deploying him as 1C again this year. How much TOI is he going to get? Toughest match ups 1st wave PK assignments 1st wave PP assignments all with a sneaking suspicion that he'll get run down like he did last year. I like ptit Jesu but he isn't a horse like I pointed out earlier. I doubt he can handle all of the above and remain productive throughout.

Ya.....he did fade away with only 7pts in the last 8 games last seasons, maybe if you repeat it alot some will believe you

 

[LaP]

of course it doesn't. it wasn't meant to. it goes without saying that looking at a singular position doesn't give a clear picture of the team as a whole.

the question is: if you have a reliable (2-way) pair of centers (70, 55 pts), can you build around it? This is the question the Habs have to answer, considering they might not have an elite center in their ranks.

I think they can build around what they have, but an elite piece is still needed - possibly at LD. I don't see Mete logging big minutes in the PO's.

Of course you can. I think it's rather silly to even ask. It doesn't matter where your elite players are playing. You just got to have them. At least one. Ideally two. Three and you can be a very serious contender. People greatly diminish Binnington's performance of last year acting like he did not do anything. He was not there it's all ROR who did it. He is likely a one hit wonder but last year he played like an elite vezina goalie for half a season and this helped the Blues a lot. Without him i don't think there's a cup.

Yes you can win a cup with a 70 points center and a 50 points center as your top 6 centers. But it will be hard if they are your two best players (no matter the position) and this is the very best they can do you while playing 82 games.

Right now we have Weber and Price. As long as they remain top players the rest of the team doesn't really have to be that great. The problem is on paper the rest of the team is below average. Gallagher, Drouin, Tatar, Lehkonen, Byron, ... as a winger group is rather weak. Danault and Domi as top centers is rather weak. The left side of the defense is abysmal and i'm being generous here.

We need to improve the team. All positions outside of Price and Weber. And we don't have 8 years to do so. I would say a maximum 5 years before the play of Weber and Price starts to diminish too much. It appears the only way to do that is by developing kid. If those kids are centers then play them there. There's no such thing as Danault is good enough unless he improves his play significantly.