GuerinUp
Registered User
One of them will also be 34 in the Fall and the other 28
one should also cost significantly less money.
One of them will also be 34 in the Fall and the other 28
Outside of the eichel and Barkov talk he makes the most sense of the known available centers out there.I do wonder what Danault ends up getting on the open market. I haven't been following him or the Habs this year, but just looking at stats for this year versus the last few:
- His points/game is down (a little)
- His average TOI is down
- He's back to ~60% defensive zone starts (when he'd been closer to 50/50 for his last 4 years in Montreal)
With all that plus a league-wide cap crunch I wonder how much role is going to factor into his choice. Minnesota's probably offering a near-guaranteed top-6 role for 2-3 years on what's already a firm playoff team. I still think he'd be a very good fit here and would give us more flexibility with Rossi.
He makes the most sense to me. And, I think we’ll make a ton of sense for him.I do wonder what Danault ends up getting on the open market. I haven't been following him or the Habs this year, but just looking at stats for this year versus the last few:
- His points/game is down (a little)
- His average TOI is down
- He's back to ~60% defensive zone starts (when he'd been closer to 50/50 for his last 4 years in Montreal)
With all that plus a league-wide cap crunch I wonder how much role is going to factor into his choice. Minnesota's probably offering a near-guaranteed top-6 role for 2-3 years on what's already a firm playoff team. I still think he'd be a very good fit here and would give us more flexibility with Rossi.
Let him take rasks spot, can’t see how he makes them worse.He makes the most sense to me. And, I think we’ll make a ton of sense for him.
one should also cost significantly less money.
And one's game is severely declining and brings virtually zero offense. The carousel of bottom 6ers continues.
Edit - And if I hear the leadership argument one more time about a declining fossil, I am gonna lose it.
im not saying i want him, im just saying theres a chance he could be better than his stats are showing (like staal when aquired), being that hes been on a terrible team for so long. i guess we will see how he does on his new team.
Understood, apologies for the misunderstanding. Maybe he will be better with a better group, interesting to see what happens.
Possibly. But Wild would still need to expose Dumba in order to have $$$ to sign Danault.You would think it would be easy to guess that with the cap and money problems with the virus some free agents will get surprisingly? Low deals but then again with the expansion will that open lots of cap to spend? Hard to say.
The combination of a flat cap and bidding against an expansion team does make me worry about putting all of our eggs in the free agency basket.You would think it would be easy to guess that with the cap and money problems with the virus some free agents will get surprisingly? Low deals but then again with the expansion will that open lots of cap to spend? Hard to say.
The combination of a flat cap and bidding against an expansion team does make me worry about putting all of our eggs in the free agency basket.
I’m still in the “blinded by nostalgia” camp that thinks Granlund could make more sense here on a short-term <$4M contract. Danault’s lack of PP time/success makes me concerned with a longer term commitment at $5M+, especially when he plays a similar style to Ek already. Granlund, on the other hand, is practically a 50% FO guy and has had strong PP performances here. Idk, it just feels like a low-risk, medium-reward type of move. Danault is substantially riskier if it’s going to cost more than 6 years @ $5M+ AAV (reported MTL offer that Danault turned down).
I don’t see Granlund coming back here, but a line of Zucc - Granlund - Kap would be fun to watch. I am curious if BG could have his eyes on RNH since the Oilers have yet to extend him (maybe they’re just leaving him as a UFA for ED reasons?)
Granlund wasn't a c, & isn't a c now
What makes a center a center is their defensive play. I don’t think that line would score more goals then they would give up.Was a C for 3 full seasons and was tried out there again the last season that he played here. I don't think he'd struggle with Kap and Zucc on his wings playing a more offensive-oriented game than Yeo's system ever allowed him. This team needs a center that can play on the #1 PP unit, I'm not sure giving a long-term contract to a guy that's barely played on the PP is the answer (Danault).
It's a risk signing Granlund to play a role he hasn't played in a while, but at least he's had a proven track record on the PP and has shown much more offensive talent than Danault. I'm not saying give Granlund a 5 year $5M AAV deal, but a 2-3 year deal @ $3.5-4M? I think the upside is pretty high if he'd take a deal like that.
Doesn't sound like the Wild are anticipating having to send that pick to Pitt for Bujstad so yay.
70 games or 35 points. He's currently at 37 and 15.what was the condition?
70 games or 35 points. He's currently at 37 and 15.
I was wondering the same, or whether it included playoff games or something. No idea.Will they prorate these for the shortened season? If so, he's on pace to exceed games played.