Sure if they played with 100 point center they would do better. But we don't have a 100 elite #1 center, we have Domi and Suzuki. The question isn't about replacing Danault with McDavid, everybody would do that, it's about whether Suzuki or Domi would actually be better. I personally doubt Domi would, Suzuki isn't there yet because he's a rookie but hopefully in the next few years he will.
But it's ironic that you claim Danault is a 3rd liner, yet all your examples are of elite #1 centers. If Danault is a 3rd liner like you claim, then shouldn't his wingers do better when centered by 2nd liners like Henrique, an over the hill Getzlaf, or Pageau? And yet I have a hard time believe Tatar and Gallagher would be that much more productive with Pageau as their center.
I can name you Horvat, Schenn, Eric Staal and say that Gallagher and Tatar would look better with them, you will dismiss it and the conversation won't go farther, that's why I used elite centres for my example.
I've never claimed Gallagher scores 30 goals because of Danault, but that's not what you claimed.
You said that: "It's a coincidence Kovalchuk produced, it's a coincidence Tatar had back to back career years, it's a coincidence that Gallagher set a career high in goals. There seem to be quite a lot of coincidences when it comes to Danault." You clearly meant it.
Your claim is that Danault brings his linemates down, his lack of offence is supposedly bringing their goal/point totals down.
I claimed that, because Danault is a grinder and I don't want that in my top-6 as a centre. He's not a goal scorer, he can't make good passes on a regular basis, He has stone hands, he can't create space and time for his wingers with his dribbles... Many times we see him lose the puck during the PP as he forces passes while he does not have the ability to execute them. He's strong against the board, he can keep the puck in these situations, can make simple passes, he's pretty good defensively, has a good hockey sense and skate well, protect the puck tremendously.
He's on pace for 55 points, playing with the best wingers in EV and in the PP. The last 39 games he's getting 1:53 on average per/game, but he's still bad on the power play, only got 3 points during that time. His skill set is not suited for the Power play.
Domi, now that he's looking like the player we watched last year and Suzuki would do better than him with Tatar and Gally. They are already close in points. Domi is not as good defensively as Danault, but Suzuki is pretty close.
Yet they've been at their best/set career highs with him. It's illogical, if Danault was bringing them down and they still did so well it must mean their previous linemates were even bigger drags on their production. And frankly I find it hard to believe that Larkin and Zetterberg brought down his production.
Gallagher was on pace for 28 goals in his rookie year with a young Eller, many years after and during his prime, he only scored 33 goals in his best year and you are here bragging that he did it with Danault. I'm sure that with a centre who can ditch the puck, he will score more goals. He's already pretty good at scoring garbage goals by his own.
Tatar is scoring at the same rate as he used to with the wings, the thing is he's getting more assists than he used to and Danault with his 13 goals is not doing much to help him in that area.
Giveaway and takeaway stats are less then useless. But if you really believe it means something then I would point out that both Tatar and Gallagher's takeaways per 60 minutes increased significantly since being paired with Danault, quite possibly because Danault's forecheck forces opposing players into making bad decisions which lead directly to turnovers.
Not really, Gally's takeaway stats improved and Tatar takeaways were high last year, but not this year, it's back to normal, so it's probably not because of Danault. I used raw stats, takeaways per 60 minutes, I don't know where to find, if you have a link, I would like to see it.
