monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"
Player Discussion - Phillip Danault: What's My Line Edition | Page 6 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
  • Xenforo Cloud upgraded our forum to XenForo version 2.3.4. This update has created styling issues to our current templates, this is just a temporary look. We will continue to work on clearing up these issues for the next few days and restore the site to it's more familiar look, but please report any other issues you may experience so we can look into. Thanks for your patience and understanding.

Player Discussion Phillip Danault: What's My Line Edition

Status
Not open for further replies.
JeffreyLFC said:
But what point exactly? That if we move up Evans to play with Tatar and Gallagher then all the problems are fixed? The same Evans that has barely 20 games of experience in the NHL?

For the Bennett vs Danault trade, why would Calgary do it? What is their incentative to get a pending UFA? They would rather keep a disgruntled asset than to trade him away.

As for Danault asking to be a top 6 player. It does not mater at all. He might want to play top 6 but it does mean he will get it with any NHL team. He has everything to lose right now with his subpar play and his contractual situation.

I personally see him as a valuable player in the long run but obviously not in a top 6 role and I don't think ANY team at this point would see differently than that.

He is throwing money away every game on his next deal because of his bad play. How does this affect us? We might be able to retain him at a way cheaper deal.
Click to expand...

So we keep the disgruntled "asset" who's play has faded to the point of no longer being effective in his role, then; that's your plan here?...best case scenario for the Habs management there is we keep Danault under a doable contract, despite his play falling off a cliff this year, in the hope that he comes to grip with his role and picks it up; that's the plan??...pray on puppies and rainbows that he pulls his head outta his arse...or, we could lose him for nothing at the end of the year cuz another team with less to lose offers him a contract at a higher rate, hoping he picks it up and recalls what made him a Selke candidate...just like we lost Radulov for nothing...and Markov for nothing...or Bergevin makes that gamble himself and we overpay again for a declining asset, harming our ability to retain other important assets and/or the ability to fill holes in the lineup with fresh talent...hockey's a business, amigo, and fans can't forget that; our team has business to do and hamstringing itself either way isn't the way business is done properly...
 
BigDaddyLurch said:
So we keep the disgruntled "asset" who's play has faded to the point of no longer being effective in his role, then; that's your plan here?...best case scenario for the Habs management there is we keep Danault under a doable contract, despite his play falling off a cliff this year, in the hope that he comes to grip with his role and picks it up; that's the plan??...pray on puppies and rainbows that he pulls his head outta his arse...or, we could lose him for nothing at the end of the year cuz another team with less to lose offers him a contract at a higher rate, hoping he picks it up and recalls what made him a Selke candidate...just like we lost Radulov for nothing...and Markov for nothing...or Bergevin makes that gamble himself and we overpay again for a declining asset, harming our ability to retain other important assets and/or the ability to fill holes in the lineup with fresh talent...hockey's a business, amigo, and fans can't forget that; our team has business to do and hamstringing itself either way isn't the way business is done properly...
Click to expand...
Radulov left because he was offered longer terms. I also think that Bergevin lowballed him and made him wanting to leave. As for Markov, I would have kept him but anyway I am not going to revise history we moved on... you should too.

As for Danault, he is struggling but he is not useless contrary to some of the popular belief around here. What I find more confusing is that the Center position is the most in demand position in the NHL and people still think it's easy to replace a Danault. I mean look at Evans...right? If Evans (which I like a lot btw) was asked to be the 1st line center people around here would be on his case because he would not produce enough offensively.

The reality, we have improved a lot at the center position with Suzuki and Kotka stepping up but we are still very far from having enough depth to just move on from Danault. Let's just say we moved on from hom (other than saving some bucks) I cannot envision Evans or Poehling do anything better offensively. We do not have the quality at the position to just get rid of Danault.

For the first time in a f***ing while we seem to have some sort of depth at center and in our forward group and apparently the solution is to remove our more experienced guy at the most important position and suddenly our team would be fixed. We are not playing a video game here, there is literally no better option available at this moment and acquiring a better option is not possible. Also you can bet that Bergevin want to make the playoff right about now and he does not give a f*** about getting asset back for Danault. The solution is internally and it's up for Claude and Phillip to find the solution for the greater good of the team.
 
JeffreyLFC said:
Radulov left because he was offered longer terms. I also think that Bergevin lowballed him and made him wanting to leave. As for Markov, I would have kept him but anyway I am not going to revise history we moved on... you should too.

As for Danault, he is struggling but he is not useless contrary to some of the popular belief around here. What I find more confusing is that the Center position is the most in demand position in the NHL and people still think it's easy to replace a Danault. I mean look at Evans...right? If Evans (which I like a lot btw) was asked to be the 1st line center people around here would be on his case because he would not produce enough offensively.

The reality, we have improved a lot at the center position with Suzuki and Kotka stepping up but we are still very far from having enough depth to just move on from Danault. Let's just say we moved on from hom (other than saving some bucks) I cannot envision Evans or Poehling do anything better offensively. We do not have the quality at the position to just get rid of Danault.

For the first time in a f***ing while we seem to have some sort of depth at center and in our forward group and apparently the solution is to remove our more experienced guy at the most important position and suddenly our team would be fixed. We are not playing a video game here, there is literally no better option available at this moment and acquiring a better option is not possible. Also you can bet that Bergevin want to make the playoff right about now and he does not give a f*** about getting asset back for Danault. The solution is internally and it's up for Claude and Phillip to find the solution for the greater good of the team.
Click to expand...

It isn't simply that Evans and Poehling would replace Danault, but also that Suzuki and Kotkaniemi would get more ice time, and that the 5 million could go elsewhere.
 
tazsub3 said:
i want to congratulate him on an awesome first goal of the season, only problem was in the wrong net. Every game , i say he cant be worst, and i am shocked to find out he can the next game
Click to expand...

Actually Weber put that one in. And, own goal was 100% Weber's fault.
 
DAChampion said:
It isn't simply that Evans and Poehling would replace Danault, but also that Suzuki and Kotkaniemi would get more ice time, and that the 5 million could go elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Which 5M? He is at 3M..
Also Right now Danault has way less icetime than Suzuki and Kotkaniemi. Do you wan both Suzuki/KK at 20+ min each?
 
JeffreyLFC said:
Which 5M? He is at 3M..
Also Right now Danault has way less icetime than Suzuki and Kotkaniemi. Do you wan both Suzuki/KK at 20+ min each?
Click to expand...

3 million dollar Danault is gone after this season. When people discuss moving on from Danault they are referring to what he wants moving forward: 5+ million/year.

Suzuki and Kotkaniemi should be averaging 36-40 minutes total a night, which they have not been.
 
DAChampion said:
3 million dollar Danault is gone after this season. When people discuss moving on from Danault they are referring to what he wants moving forward: 5+ million/year.
Click to expand...
He is not getting 5M. Right now he is in the 3M-4M bracket
 
Is Danault his own agent ? Because he's clearly getting an Anthony Duclair type of contract. I defended him in the past but the guy legit sucks ass.
 
Out of curiosity, anyone ever consider Danault gets more ice not cause Julien wants to give it to him but rather he has no choice?
 
canucklover123 said:
How do you figure
Click to expand...

Suzuki has outplayed him on both ends of the ice for over a year now and Kotkaniemi outplayed him in the bubble by a large margin...this year, Evans and Suzuki are much better defensively and Kotkaniemi is closing the gap behind...Danault is our weakest link at centre now except on faceoffs, where Evans is right behind him (Suzuki & KK still need to work on that)...Clod is the problem and sitting (or trading) Danault may be the solution...
 
What a rough start for this guy. He must be going to bed these days wondering what the hell he was thinking turning down that cash.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top
-->->