C Nick Suzuki - Guelph Storm, OHL (2017, 13th, VGK; traded to MTL)

[Legend123]

Danault is one of the leagues best 3rd line Cs , he is part of the solution in Montreal. He's getting some Selke votes this offseason that's for sure. The hate he will eventually get is if/when he is favoured ahead of guys like Kotkaniemi or even eventually Poehling/Suzuki.

Kotkaniemi
Poehling
Danault

Seems like a nice trio of Centers for the forseeable future.

Kotkaniemi
Suzuki
Poehling
looks alot better

 

[Habsrule]

Kotkaniemi
Suzuki
Poehling
looks alot better

Kotkaniemi
Suzuki
Poehling
Danault

Looks even better.


Imagine the depth of having a player like Danault as the fourth line center.

 

[Legend123]

Kotkaniemi
Suzuki
Poehling
Danault

Looks even better.


Imagine the depth of having a player like Danault as the fourth line center.

a waste of an asset

 

[Peeps]

I think the plan is to have this happening:

1-Kotka
2-Domi
3-Danault

Suzuki and Poehling as winger.

 

[Legend123]

I think the plan is to have this happening:

1-Kotka
2-Domi
3-Danault

Suzuki and Poehling as winger.

lol Poehling is def not gonna be a W. Hes a pure C and Berge loves him.

 

[Deficient Mode]

Can't see Danault being displaced from his first line role any time soon with how dominant he was with Tatar and Gallagher, and how well they complemented each other. Suzuki, Poehling, and even Kotkaniemi have work to do to surpass Danault. Hard to believe so many people are mad at Danault's usage when the Habs first line was one of the best at 5 on 5 in the league this year.

 

[Kunta Kinte]

Can't see Danault being displaced from his first line role any time soon with how dominant he was with Tatar and Gallagher, and how well they complemented each other. Suzuki, Poehling, and even Kotkaniemi have work to do to surpass Danault. Hard to believe so many people are mad at Danault's usage when the Habs first line was one of the best at 5 on 5 in the league this year.

Oof.

 

[CheldishGamibno]

3 pts tonight, 20 pts in 11 games, Guelph from 0-3 to 4-3 against London. Not bad.

 

[jfhabs]

Oof.

Dominent is a bit strong. Very efficient is how I would call it. Still pretty impressive to have 50+ pts with next to no pp time.

 

[HockeyDBspecialist]

Kotkaniemi
Suzuki
Poehling
Danault

Looks even better.


Imagine the depth of having a player like Danault as the fourth line center.

your wasting assets with 4 #1-2 Center. They won't all have 20 minutes of play and you need niche/specialty players on 3rd and 4th.

 

[HockeyDBspecialist]

I think the plan is to have this happening:

1-Kotka
2-Domi
3-Danault

Suzuki and Poehling as winger.

Poehling is the closest to a pure Center you can have. Would you put Bergeron or couturier on the wing ? similar player.
Suzuki or Domi will be move to the wing

 

[Deficient Mode]

Dominent is a bit strong. Very efficient is how I would call it. Still pretty impressive to have 50+ pts with next to no pp time.

They had the best goal differential of any line at 5 on 5 this year. 66% GF and 62% xGF - both among the top marks of any line in the league that spent significant time together. They were one of the best lines in the league this year. If they didn't put up 80+ points that you'd expect of such a title, it was because the team's power play was terrible (and of course they didn't play together there). Lines imply 5 on 5 play however, and people who are unhappy with the Tatar-Danault-Gallagher line are ignorant. I certainly see Suzuki quickly passing Danault on the power play depth chart, but Danault already doesn't play there, as you mentioned.

 

[Dominance]

your wasting assets with 4 #1-2 Center. They won't all have 20 minutes of play and you need niche/specialty players on 3rd and 4th.

Slow your roll. Kotkaniemi has great potential but has miles to go to be a #1C and could easily cap out as an average 2C. Suzuki may or may not be a centre at the NHL level and you should wait until he at least plays professional hockey before calling him a top-6 player. Same pretty much goes for Poehling, whose ceiling of a 2C is highly debatable (and 1C isn’t even worth the discussion). Danault played very well this past year but, again, is more of a 2C when he’s at his absolute peak form.

 

[CDN24]

Poehling is the closest to a pure Center you can have. Would you put Bergeron or couturier on the wing ? similar player.
Suzuki or Domi will be move to the wing

In an ideal world both are on the wing eventually.

In 2-3 years Kotkaniemi and Poehling are your top 2 centres. Danault is 3rd and you use a 4th line centre to centre the 4th line. Suzuki and Gallagher are your top 2 RW. Domi is your top line LW. Drouin or Tatar is no 2. A third line of Tatar/danault and maybe Shaw looks pretty good to me. In an ideal world Suzuki plays RW.

 

[jfhabs]

They had the best goal differential of any line at 5 on 5 this year. 66% GF and 62% xGF - both among the top marks of any line in the league that spent significant time together. They were one of the best lines in the league this year. If they didn't put up 80+ points that you'd expect of such a title, it was because the team's power play was terrible (and of course they didn't play together there). Lines imply 5 on 5 play however, and people who are unhappy with the Tatar-Danault-Gallagher line are ignorant. I certainly see Suzuki quickly passing Danault on the power play depth chart, but Danault already doesn't play there, as you mentioned.

I guess it's subjective. I think it's fair to say Danault and his line were dominant 5 on 5 and PK, but for me to call a player dominant overall he also needs to be a top point producer. If he was a dominant player he would play on the first pp line, for exemple, and be producing there as well.

 

[CDN24]

I guess it's subjective. I think it's fair to say Danault and his line were dominant 5 on 5 and PK, but for me to call a player dominant overall he also needs to be a top point producer. If he was a dominant player he would play on the first pp line, for exemple, and be producing there as well.

Given how historically bad that PP was maybe he was saving Danault for 5-5. I guess it was to manage workload as Danault was the main PK centre but I think they should have used him and his line on the PP. It couldn't be worse could it. Danault had 4 points in 39 mins of PP time- usually at the end of a PP. Domi had 11 pts in 211. If Danault would have produced at his rate and had 211 PP mins he would have produced 22 PP points- maybe more with 1st unit usage.

 

[Deficient Mode]

I guess it's subjective. I think it's fair to say Danault and his line were dominant 5 on 5 and PK, but for me to call a player dominant overall he also needs to be a top point producer. If he was a dominant player he would play on the first pp line, for exemple, and be producing there as well.

Well I never said he was dominant alone. I don't think he's one of the perennial 25-30 best centers in the league. The line was dominant together however, and definitely one of the best first lines in the league - again, at 5 on 5 only - and shouldn't be broken up when people are making these lineups and pushing Danault down to a fourth line role in favor of Poehling and Suzuki. The players at the heart of the power play won't necessarily be those on the first line: the attributes that make Gallagher (and to a lesser extent, Tatar) so effective at even strength are less important on the power play. I'm excited to see Suzuki on the power play, but the idea that Danault deserves fourth line minutes is crazy.

 

[jfhabs]

Well I never said he was dominant alone. I don't think he's one of the perennial 25-30 best centers in the league. The line was dominant together however, and definitely one of the best first lines in the league - again, at 5 on 5 only - and shouldn't be broken up when people are making these lineups and pushing Danault down to a fourth line role in favor of Poehling and Suzuki. The players at the heart of the power play won't necessarily be those on the first line: the attributes that make Gallagher (and to a lesser extent, Tatar) so effective at even strength are less important on the power play. I'm excited to see Suzuki on the power play, but the idea that Danault deserves fourth line minutes is crazy.

Yes, totally agree

 

[Jack DiBiase]

Kotkaniemi
Suzuki
Poehling
Danault

Looks even better.


Imagine the depth of having a player like Danault as the fourth line center.

Hold your horses fellow Habs fans. Stop believing every single prospect will always max their potential. I remember when everyone was posting lists like this and fantasizing about our tremendous center depth:

Chipchura
Locke
Lapierre
Urquhart

 

[Kunta Kinte]

Hold your horses fellow Habs fans. Stop believing every single prospect will always max their potential. I remember when everyone was posting lists like this and fantasizing about our tremendous center depth:

Chipchura
Locke
Lapierre
Urquhart

I get your point. But they don't have the same pedigree at all.

 

[Merci Saku]

Hold your horses fellow Habs fans. Stop believing every single prospect will always max their potential. I remember when everyone was posting lists like this and fantasizing about our tremendous center depth:

Chipchura
Locke
Lapierre
Urquhart

What a bad comparaison

 

[Arthur Morgan]

Hold your horses fellow Habs fans. Stop believing every single prospect will always max their potential. I remember when everyone was posting lists like this and fantasizing about our tremendous center depth:

Chipchura
Locke
Lapierre
Urquhart

Oh come on Suzuki is going to be a special player. 100% worth Patches. he 100% is worthy of be excited for and should be a solid player. especially in today's NHL

 

[Kotkaniemi15]

Hold your horses fellow Habs fans. Stop believing every single prospect will always max their potential. I remember when everyone was posting lists like this and fantasizing about our tremendous center depth:

Chipchura
Locke
Lapierre
Urquhart

What a bad post. Let's examine. Firstly, which of these former prospects were drafted third overall, let alone the top 15? Poehling was a steal at 25 and has already proven that he was a good pick. Danault is one of the top defensive C's in the league while managing to put up 53 points. Chipchurra took 3 years to play a significant amount of games on the Habs and didn't play over 40 games until 2009-10. I don't think too many people were ecstatic about the prospect of Chipchurra coming in. None of these prospects were legit. Only one of them was a first round pick. The modern day prospect pool is legit.

 

[jfhabs]

What a bad post. Let's examine. Firstly, which of these former prospects were drafted third overall, let alone the top 15? Poehling was a steal at 25 and has already proven that he was a good pick. Danault is one of the top defensive C's in the league while managing to put up 53 points. Chipchurra took 3 years to play a significant amount of games on the Habs and didn't play over 40 games until 2009-10. I don't think too many people were ecstatic about the prospect of Chipchurra coming in. None of these prospects were legit. Only one of them was a first round pick. The modern day prospect pool is legit.

Chip was legit up until he badly injured his knee. He lost a lot of speed and couldn't reach his potential. That's what I remember... I would assume people would also put Ribeiro in their ideal future C chart, which wouldn't look as bad as the other poster suggested. LaPierre was never highly seen as a top 6 player and I think he ended up having a pretty good career as a 4th liner

 

[the paisanos guy]

Hold your horses fellow Habs fans. Stop believing every single prospect will always max their potential. I remember when everyone was posting lists like this and fantasizing about our tremendous center depth:

Chipchura
Locke
Lapierre
Urquhart

Lol the best prospect in that group was Chipchura and he wasn't even a PPG player in Juniors. Horrible, horrible comparison as others have said.

I wonder if Corey Locke could have had a legitimate chance though if he was 10+ years younger. He was an undersized player at possibly the worst time in the history of the NHL.