Now how much would you give Danault? (5/6 year contract)

[nilan30]

In a weird way I'd be less likely to re-sign him if the Habs win the cup.

 

[cedouimet]

If rumors are true, he turned down a 5.5M$ x 5 years...

I guess with his playoff performances, that is about the starting point...

I would play fairball with him. Offer is still on the table. Take a look at what you will be offered by other teams but comeback before signing to let us know...might work since he's born here

 

[Habs Halifax]

It's hard to quantify the shutdown work Danault has been doing and how big his role has been within our system . Pageau has been producing way more offense though and is every bit as big of a part of his team's success.I'd probably give the edge to Pageau if I'm being honest.

Interesting debate between Pageau and Danault. Would it be fair to say that the Pageau line gets better match-up situations? Danault's line is strictly used for the other teams top line. Not so sure the Pageau line is used that way all the time.

 

[Habs Halifax]

If rumors are true, he turned down a 5.5M$ x 5 years...

I guess with his playoff perfor.ances that is about the starting point...

I would play fairball with him. Offer is still on the table. Take a look at what you will be offered by otger teams but comeback before signing to let us know...might work since he's born here

This right here! ^^^^^

You nailed it! Context is there if you choose to see it but some are in denial and think he is around $4M. I'd be shocked if that happens.

 

[McGees]

Great at shutting down (ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE TEAM!!!)
...but 2 assists in 16 games (also went a year without a goal ffs)
4.5 is my special price offer or see ya.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Great at shutting down (ALONG WITH THE REST OF THE TEAM!!!)
...but 2 assists in 16 games (also went a year without a goal ffs)
4.5 is my special price offer or see ya.

Would you be upset with a 3 year term and where $0.5M to $1M overpayment (according to your standards) but it don't end up hurting us cause it's during bridge years of the kids?

Also, Do you think not having Danault affects Suzuki? No ripple effects one bit in the match-up game?

This is not some trap. It's genuine questions

 

[Koivu11]

5M max.

He doesn’t bring enough offense to give him more.

 

[RussCourtnallsGhost]

As good as Danault has been in these playoffs, and as much as I appreciate his skillset when he's on his game, it's pretty hard to justify giving that much money to someone who has 1 goal and 7 points in 32 career playoff games. As great as this playoff run has been, at some point we have to ask ourselves, is this our model for long-term success? I'm ecstatic that it's working out now, but long term? Unlikely, I think.
I hope we can working something out with him though, but it's a pretty big risk.

 

[Whitesnake]

Idea here is this...You WANT a guy like Danault on your team. You NEED a guy like him.....on a 3rd line. That could rack minutes if your offensive force isn't doing a shit and you will win by stopping opposition rather than outscoring them. So if the idea is to keep winning and keep contending....if you don't want to keep him 'cause it's too much money and you don't want to use him on a top 2 lines, don't do it. Just make sure a kid like Evans is ready to be the defensive force and might even bring more offensively. Maybe not as good right from the bat, but he might very well be.

Then...use that 5.5M$ to great use. But somehow, you need to make sure that you have a really good defensively responsible C, whether it's Evans, or Poehling, or somebody else outside of the team.

 

[Habs Halifax]

Reminds me of the Bobby Holik contract. I think he'll get insane UFA offers Bergevin won't be able to match. GMs will see him as a top 6 center with intangibles. They will want to improve their team's culture.

Not going to be the same with a flat cap. Danault will get no shortage of $4.5M to $5M offers IMO. I doubt anybody offers $6M and if they do, it's a team at the bottom 10 and a team Danault don't want to go to.

3 year deal is what I say. Takes him to UFA again at age 31 and when the cap is expected to grow again. Give him the NMC and July bonus structure. Settle at $5M or $5.5M and focus on other things.

If he wants more than 3 years, tell him that it's risky with the kids exiting bridge deals. So if he wants 5 years or more, we still offer NMC and July money but AAV has to come down. It's a fair approach

 

[MolleSon]

Idea here is this...You WANT a guy like Danault on your team. You NEED a guy like him.....on a 3rd line. That could rack minutes if your offensive force isn't doing a shit and you will win by stopping opposition rather than outscoring them. So if the idea is to keep winning and keep contending....if you don't want to keep him 'cause it's too much money and you don't want to use him on a top 2 lines, don't do it. Just make sure a kid like Evans is ready to be the defensive force and might even bring more offensively. Maybe not as good right from the bat, but he might very well be.

Then...use that 5.5M$ to great use. But somehow, you need to make sure that you have a really good defensively responsible C, whether it's Evans, or Poehling, or somebody else outside of the team.

Exactly my toughts. If Evans is ready - or say 90% ready -, we can afford to lose Danault. He's a good leader, a great defensive center and a local kid. We WANT the skill set. But he's not worth 5 or even 5,5 on a flat cap, especially when we have a 10,5 goalie and a Weber at 7,8 + have to resign Suzuki and KK. We also need a good LW and a puck moving DF. Lets be realistic. If Evans is ready (and I know its a big IF), let him walk.

 

[Mike8]

That's one way to loose him where he walks to another team... offer less than $4M

I'm OK with that. Very good defense can be taught. There are a lot of players in the league that can be successful shut-down centremen. I don't think he'd be that hard to replace, and don't think contenders can afford to pay ~$4m+ for shutdown Cs.

A step in the right direction for the club would be Suzuki-Kotkaniemi developing sufficiently so the team can go power vs power for the first time in decades--and that's not going to happen while a shutdown C is playing 18-20mins a night.

 

[CHfan1]

$4.25 -$4.5 million on a 5-6 year contract in a flat cap NHL. As a note the flat cap has made a significant impact in the amount of long term contracts given out, with only 6 forwards getting 5 year or longer contracts and only 2 forwards getting 6 or more (since March of 2020). If Danault prioritizes a long term contract (and I think he will), he has to take a bit less.

Like Ray Ferraro said in the segment below (starting at 6:45 left to go) at some point you need some offensive bang for your buck.

Danault just doesn’t bring enough of that, imo, to justify more with 7 goals and 40 points in his last 100 games (which includes playoff games).

Ferraro also doesn’t think teams will give $5.5 million-$6million for a 40 point centre despite everything else he does well.

Ferraro does mention 4 years at $4.5 million.

 

[HOPE]

His contract is definitely going to suck long term when it's time to sign some kids. Wish Evans stayed healthy, i strongly believe he can replace Danault.

 

[WeThreeKings]

I think you just let him walk if he wants that long of term.. he's not an offensive center, he's a shut down center and that shouldn't be more than 3-4 years at under 5m.

 

[Censored Toad]

Enjoy the run but he's over paid for being a shut down guy at anything above 3.5. 4 Is my max and even then its a tough pill to swallow.

As great as he's been , one post season of "elite" shutdown play doesn't warrant that payout.

 

[McGees]

Would you be upset with a 3 year term and where $0.5M to $1M overpayment (according to your standards) but it don't end up hurting us cause it's during bridge years of the kids?

Also, Do you think not having Danault affects Suzuki? No ripple effects one bit in the match-up game?

This is not some trap. It's genuine questions

I think we should skip the bridge with Suzuki and go long term now before his stats REALLY rise.
I don't think Suzuli is affected but KK is the one who could use a little more seasoning so a short term Danault contract could be good for him.
I'm not sure but I just don't think we can afford to pay a defensive C that much...with Tatar likely gone and the young guys getting more minutes, Danault is gonna be a 30 pt guy and that means 4 million TOPS imo.

 

[teamfirst]

4.5 but he wil get better offer elsewhere

 

[canucklover123]

I posted in the Danault thread.

nick Bonino got a 4.1X4 after his run in Pittsburgh, where he signed with Nashville to be a 3C. Less offensive and defensive than danault but valuable in those runs. Signed around the same age ish as well

IMO danault has a lot more hype, someone will pay him more but i see 5 being a good amount

 

[Capz]

I just don't see where he fits in 2-3 years and I think he will want a longer term so I don't think we resign him. I really believe in evans and poehling to round out our c's if we need a vet in the interim we can find one for cheaper it's honestly a very hard call though.

 

[26Mats]

If rumors are true, he turned down a 5.5M$ x 5 years...

I guess with his playoff performances, that is about the starting point...

I would play fairball with him. Offer is still on the table. Take a look at what you will be offered by other teams but comeback before signing to let us know...might work since he's born here

I heard 5M x 6 yrs, no?

 

[26Mats]

Exactly my toughts. If Evans is ready - or say 90% ready -, we can afford to lose Danault. He's a good leader, a great defensive center and a local kid. We WANT the skill set. But he's not worth 5 or even 5,5 on a flat cap, especially when we have a 10,5 goalie and a Weber at 7,8 + have to resign Suzuki and KK. We also need a good LW and a puck moving DF. Lets be realistic. If Evans is ready (and I know its a big IF), let him walk.

I'd like a Danault-Evans shutdown duo as the core of a shutdown line.

Better to have more than 4 centers in case of injury.

But we have 13 forwards once Evan's gets healthy, plus Drouin. So 2 of those will likely not be back.

 

[ottawa]

As good as Danault has been in these playoffs, and as much as I appreciate his skillset when he's on his game, it's pretty hard to justify giving that much money to someone who has 1 goal and 7 points in 32 career playoff games. As great as this playoff run has been, at some point we have to ask ourselves, is this our model for long-term success? I'm ecstatic that it's working out now, but long term? Unlikely, I think.
I hope we can working something out with him though, but it's a pretty big risk.

I agree with you but not for the reasons you mentioned.

This guy just shut down AM/Marner, then Wheeler/Ehlers and now Stone/Pacioretty. f*** his lack of points, that's the least of my concerns.

I simply don't think he fits in our longterm plans as an overpaid 3C

 

[tellermine]

4.
5 with a ring.

 

[Mike8]

I posted in the Danault thread.

nick Bonino got a 4.1X4 after his run in Pittsburgh, where he signed with Nashville to be a 3C. Less offensive and defensive than danault but valuable in those runs. Signed around the same age ish as well

IMO danault has a lot more hype, someone will pay him more but i see 5 being a good amount

Bonino put up 18 points in 24 games in one of the Pens runs.

Comparing their respective best goal-scoring seasons:
Danault: 13, 13, 12
Bonino: 22, 18, 18, 17, 15

Goal scoring typically commands a bit more of a premium. Bonino's playoff scoring would add to that premium.

Danault's better defensively than Bonino was.

The end result, though, is that the Bonino signing was bad for Nashville.