Jump to content

New players means new lines - What would you do?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 338
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think that’s two different issues.    We lost the sergachev trade. Fine. It’s done. Sucks - but it’s done.    but 5.5 for a 50+ pt 2nd line forward? That’s the going rate.    As

I’ve read a number of us are unhappy with Drouin - but the 2019-20 season began to fall apart AFTER Drouin was injured. Up to that point, Drouin started STRONG and the injury was terrible timing for h

Ill put it another way,    He isn;t anything close to his contract, he is a floater and invisible most nights .   The trade for Sergachev was terrible    

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

Danault contract is going to be a challenge I think. If Gallagher is the highest paid forward then what would the offer be from MB?

 

 I certainly want to resign Danault and I think that he is underrated. I wonder what his demands are? Does he want 7 million a season and could he get that on open market?

 

if for whatever reason Danault leaves then there is no chance CJ plays Evans or Poehling at 3c. Better chance of seeing Drouin there. 

Rightly or wrongly, unless he has a breakout offensive season I doubt MB goes over $4.5.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

Drouin is surely not the right player to slot into C.

Lol yeah that didn’t work well

 

We need Danault and perhaps he gets some time with new line mates. I’m pretty high on Perry so you may not agree but I think Perry - Danault- Gallagher would be really tough to play against 

 

im guessing he signs for 6 x 6. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

... We need Danault and perhaps he gets some time with new line mates. I’m pretty high on Perry so you may not agree but I think Perry - Danault- Gallagher would be really tough to play against ...

 

They would be ... but I don't see it working full-time ... doubt Perry has the legs for it ... but in certain circumstances I could see Julien putting them together

 

1 hour ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

... im guessing he signs for 6 x 6. 

 

IMO that would put the Habs in a cap crunch ... Per CapFriendly, that leaves $10.3 million left to sign/replace UFAs Tartar, Armia, Frolik, Perry and Weal (although the latter is a relief to be off the books IMO), and RFAs KK and Lehkonen ... as well as the need for the 7th D ... and with Suzuki and Romanov pending RFAs in 21/22

Not making any guesses about who Seattle takes (in the next few months we should see theories espoused about why almost anyone on the team should be exposed and why the Kraken will select them).

 

KK's current AAV (if his ELC bonuses are reached) is $3.425 ... doubt he signs for less than that, and if he pans out as we all hope this season it will be the Hab's best chance to tie him up long-term and "buy-out" some UFA years ... really hope Poehling (or another youngster) gets his act together and takes a HUGE step towards being able to fill the 3C ... or the Habs have such a good season that a solid UFA 3C wants to join up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't see them signing Danault to a 6x6. He may be able to get that on the open market, but it's too high ($6M) and too long (to age 34) for the Habs; at 6x6 they'd be looking at Suzuki/Kotkaniemi as 1C/2C and minimizing the gap at 3C.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

Lol yeah that didn’t work well

 

We need Danault and perhaps he gets some time with new line mates. I’m pretty high on Perry so you may not agree but I think Perry - Danault- Gallagher would be really tough to play against 

 

im guessing he signs for 6 x 6. 

If Perry is anything more than  a 4th liner with occasional 3rd line duty, we are in trouble. He is no longer capable of that role and his penalties when considering his reduced offensive production are going to be hard to take. I don’t mind him as 4th line depth, anything more than that.means we are weaker on the wing than I think we are.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, tomh009 said:

I can't see them signing Danault to a 6x6. He may be able to get that on the open market, but it's too high ($6M) and too long (to age 34) for the Habs; at 6x6 they'd be looking at Suzuki/Kotkaniemi as 1C/2C and minimizing the gap at 3C.

 

My guess is that MB will be determined not to lose Danault, owing to two factors: one, Danault is the kind of player coaches and managers love (maybe a little too much; I dislike the nearly universal preference for reliability and defensive soundness over skill and panache, but it’s a fact of modern NHL life, a league where Wayne Gretzky probably have been consigned to the minors until he “learned to play the right way”). Second, MB made a trade to get him and it probably strokes his massive ego to contemplate what a canny trade that was, so he will be reluctant to part with this ongoing testament to his supposed acumen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Danault isn't a 3C though. 

 

He's going to continue to play the most minutes (or second most) of the centres every game for the simple reason that he is used against the other team's top line and the other team will play their top line the most minutes.

 

He also is going to be the number 1 PK unit. 

So his usage doesn't scream #3 C. 

Add to that, his production 5v5 is right there with anyone not named McDavid, Draisaitl, MacKinnon while doing that job.  And yes, he doesn't have the PP points, so thats a discount.... but $6 million a season is not out of the question or a crazy ask for what he provides. 

He will get that, whether in Montreal or elsewhere as he's a legitimate #2 Centre with big responsibilities at both ends of the ice.  He might even get more, but in a flat cap environment I'm saying 6.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Add to that, his production 5v5 is right there with anyone not named McDavid, Draisaitl, MacKinnon while doing that job.  And yes, he doesn't have the PP points, so thats a discount.... but $6 million a season is not out of the question or a crazy ask for what he provides. 


He will get that, whether in Montreal or elsewhere as he's a legitimate #2 Centre with big responsibilities at both ends of the ice.  He might even get more, but in a flat cap environment I'm saying 6.

 

I think you are right, he'll probably get $6M. And he is indeed very good.

 

But if it's 6x6 that he wants, as Prime Minister Koivu suggested, I think it's extremely difficult to do in Montreal, given the upcoming young players we have.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, tomh009 said:

Drouin is surely not the right player to slot into C.

 

Amen to that.  Drouin barely has enough hockey IQ/defensive-mindedness to be a winger at the NHL level.  At center he'd be a disaster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

+1 to Commandant’s post. Danault is too important to us and he does so much. 
 

I bet Tatar won’t be back and perhaps Caufield takes his spot. 

 

Just like Evans won't be ready to step in for Danault, neither will Caufield be able to fill Tatar's skates in the short term.

 

There will be some hard choices to be made next summer. This year Bergevin was able to basically just add players, not losing anyone of significance (apart from Domi), but it won't  be as easy next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

My guess is that MB will be determined not to lose Danault, owing to two factors: one, Danault is the kind of player coaches and managers love (maybe a little too much; I dislike the nearly universal preference for reliability and defensive soundness over skill and panache, but it’s a fact of modern NHL life, a league where Wayne Gretzky probably have been consigned to the minors until he “learned to play the right way”). Second, MB made a trade to get him and it probably strokes his massive ego to contemplate what a canny trade that was, so he will be reluctant to part with this ongoing testament to his supposed acumen. 


MB stroked his own ego when it came to the Domi/Galchenyuk trade with comments like “fans haven’t seen Domi play yet” and still shipped Domi out a couple of seasons later. It was a good trade as well.
 

I suspect the hypothesis here is slightly off base. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

If Perry is anything more than  a 4th liner with occasional 3rd line duty, we are in trouble. He is no longer capable of that role and his penalties when considering his reduced offensive production are going to be hard to take. I don’t mind him as 4th line depth, anything more than that.means we are weaker on the wing than I think we are.

 

I think Perry's true value is in the playoffs, if he is healthy then he can be a key contributor, he knows what it takes to be successful in the playoffs and he will do whatever it takes. Obviously he is not the player he once was but I am happy with the signing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tomh009 said:

 

Just like Evans won't be ready to step in for Danault, neither will Caufield be able to fill Tatar's skates in the short term.

 

There will be some hard choices to be made next summer. This year Bergevin was able to basically just add players, not losing anyone of significance (apart from Domi), but it won't  be as easy next year.

 

True, some tough decisions to make , if they keep Danault then Tatar is gone as I don't think they can sign both. Tatar can more easily be replaced. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, tomh009 said:

 

Just like Evans won't be ready to step in for Danault, neither will Caufield be able to fill Tatar's skates in the short term.

 

There will be some hard choices to be made next summer. This year Bergevin was able to basically just add players, not losing anyone of significance (apart from Domi), but it won't  be as easy next year.


Absolutely Tom. MB has some tough choices coming up. I can’t see a scenario where MB chooses Tatar over Danault and unless something unexpected happens (like trading defenders) I don’t see Tatar here anymore 

 

The only way Danault isn’t back IMO is if his salary demands are absurd 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

True, some tough decisions to make , if they keep Danault then Tatar is gone as I don't think they can sign both. Tatar can more easily be replaced. 

I agree.

and I hope Danault stays for the length of his next contraxt

with the Habs.

He is a high draft pick that is playing to his expected potential and he still has room to improve ( as he said recently)

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:


MB stroked his own ego when it came to the Domi/Galchenyuk trade with comments like “fans haven’t seen Domi play yet” and still shipped Domi out a couple of seasons later. It was a good trade as well.
 

I suspect the hypothesis here is slightly off base. 

 

Could be, but Domi’s play dropped off considerably and he didn’t handle things with much grace. Danault, meanwhile, remains Mr. Consistency. Now if he keeps popping off in the media about how he is entitled to a top-6 role regardless of whether KK emerges as the second coming of Kopitar, that would flip the script, because then he would be irritating MB’s ego rather than stroking it. Anyhow: time will tell, but I say the Habs lock him up to a long-term deal which they will probably come to regret on the back end. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Could be, but Domi’s play dropped off considerably and he didn’t handle things with much grace. Danault, meanwhile, remains Mr. Consistency. Now if he keeps popping off in the media about how he is entitled to a top-6 role regardless of whether KK emerges as the second coming of Kopitar, that would flip the script, because then he would be irritating MB’s ego rather than stroking it. Anyhow: time will tell, but I say the Habs lock him up to a long-term deal which they will probably come to regret on the back end. 

I’m personally one of the rare ones who wants Danault out of here. Not forcefully, but I’d rather have a more potently skilled, power play capable #1 center. Similar to what you said, if Danault accepts a lesser role, then I am completely fine with keeping him. But then as was mentioned, you aren’t paying Danault 6 million to be your third line center. 
 

I’m fine with him as a second line center in the end, but would personally spend my 6 million on a more offensive player. Yes he did well 5 on 5, as did Zach Hyman. Anyone is welcome to openly bash me, but I still think higher of Plekanec in general than Danault, and much preferred spending 6 million on him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

I’m personally one of the rare ones who wants Danault out of here. Not forcefully, but I’d rather have a more potently skilled, power play capable #1 center. Similar to what you said, if Danault accepts a lesser role, then I am completely fine with keeping him. But then as was mentioned, you aren’t paying Danault 6 million to be your third line center. 
 

I’m fine with him as a second line center in the end, but would personally spend my 6 million on a more offensive player. Yes he did well 5 on 5, as did Zach Hyman. Anyone is welcome to openly bash me, but I still think higher of Plekanec in general than Danault, and much preferred spending 6 million on him. 

 

I think it depends on KK’s progression. If Kotkaniemi plays like he did in the playoffs for the entire season, then Danault will have to accept a reduced role, one where he is used as a pure checking C. And since he doesn’t want that, quite reasonably arguing that he is a top-6 C, the best play would indeed be to move him out, since he will not want to be part of the Habs going forward. Of course, we’re not likely to trade him during a playoff push, so that would mean that he walks as a UFA.

 

The timing is tricky. What if KK shows flashes of Koptiar-like dominance, but also goes through long dry spells (which, frankly, is what I would expect)? In that case I am guessing MB will re-sign Danault to a fat contract and we will temporarily defer the problem of what to do if and when KK really emerges as an impact C. The difference is that that problem would now be compounded by said fat contract.

 

Finally, if KK never does emerge as more than a big, physical 3rd-line C, then locking up Danault would be wise. It’s too bad we don’t have one more year to make the decision; KK is still too early in his development for us to be fully confident in his ceiling.

 

EDIT: is Danault better than Pleks? Not in my opinion, because Pleks had more offensive dynamism. But it’s an interesting argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

... The only way Danault isn’t back IMO is if his salary demands are absurd ...

 

The issue will be what is absurd?  

 

It would have a different context (IMO) if the Habs did not have KK becoming an RFA next summer and Suzuki the year after ... assuming KK builds on what he showed in the tournament what Danault is offered next summer may depend on whether MB offers KK a bridge deal or a contract that buys up UFA years ... if I've done my math right, KK becomes a UFA July 1, 2025 (24 yrs-old but 7 years service) ... so, for example, an 8 year deal would cover years RFA 4-7 and buy out 3 years of free agency (the "Nathan MacKinnon" contract approach) ... same will be true for Suzuki on July 1, 2022 ... if MB takes the long-term approach for both that increases the near term cost of each and might seriously impact both the term and dollars that MB can offer Danault ... if he goes for bridge deals that leaves a bit more room for Danault but will mean KK and NS's next contracts cover fewer RFA years, driving up the AAV on along-term deal as more UFA users need to be bought up.

 

Some of how MB proceeds may depend on how secure he feels ... if he feels his security is year-to-year (which can be different than his actual contract) then he may be tempted to go bridge deal and have more money to spend for 2021/22 (and 2022/23 with Suzuki).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. In the salary cap NHL, at some point you need switch to the youth and then you can no longer keep all your valued (and valuable) veterans. I think it all depends on how good Suzuki and Kotkaniemi look this coming season, even more so than what Evans or Poehling can do. If they look like they are ready to take on 1C and 2C for the 2021-22 season, letting Danault go may be the right move for the long term, even if it comes with short-term challenges.

 

Not an easy decision, to be sure. It would be easier one year later, but Danault's contract is up this year so it will not wait.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really, really, don't get the MB's Ego won't let him make X move bit. 

 

He traded his first ever draft pick in Galchenyuk.  He's moved Domi as stated. He's not afraid to move a top 10 pick in Sergachev. He's been aggressive in trades all over the place.  I don't see him holding onto players because of ego. 

 

He will try to re-sign Danault, cause he's an important part of the team. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Commandant said:

He will try to re-sign Danault, cause he's an important part of the team. 

Which centres might you consider as comparable to Danault?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...