Jump to content

Are Gallagher and Danault expendable now with the depth?


Recommended Posts

On 10/14/2020 at 1:50 PM, Commandant said:

This Habs team will thrive by having 3 or even 4 lines that can score.  It will be through depth that they win games. There is no true gamebreaker.  They need the depth.  Gallagher is a 30-35 goal guy

 

Also with the youth of Suzuki and KK, Danault, with his strong two-way play is an important security blanket. 

 

 

Thats the interesting thing,  the Habs might have 3 solid lines could end up with 150 pts/line.  ex: 3 guys with 50 pts on each line.  However, 1 of those lines should be able to produce 180 pts (ex:  3 guys with 60 pts/line) if not 2 lines, and its possible all 3 might.  As wild as that sounds, it is not completely unrealistic.  Gally, Tatar, Danault, Toffoli, Anderson, Drouin, Suzuki, KK, and Armia are likely capable of 50 pts on the low end and up to 60 pts on the high end. 

 

Regarding Danault, I'm not sure what he is worth, but I doubt I would give him 5 mil or more/yr. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Danault is not expendable this coming season ... summer (fall?) of 2021 is yet to be determined ... it will depend on (a) how KK and Suzuki further develop, (b) how extension negotiations go and (c) what, if any, options are available to replace PD if he leaves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GHT120 said:

Danault is not expendable this coming season ... summer (fall?) of 2021 is yet to be determined ... it will depend on (a) how KK and Suzuki further develop, (b) how extension negotiations go and (c) what, if any, options are available to replace PD if he leaves.

 

You're totally right, but thats because the got rid of Domi.  You (b) is actually part of my argument for having kept Domi.  i.e. what does Danault think he's worth?  If it similar to what Domi signed for with CBJ then the Habs probably should kept Domi and traded Danault and replaced him with KK.  In that scenario the Habs would gain a lot more offence than what they'd give up defensively. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

 

You're totally right, but thats because the got rid of Domi.  You (b) is actually part of my argument for having kept Domi.  i.e. what does Danault think he's worth?  If it similar to what Domi signed for with CBJ then the Habs probably should kept Domi and traded Danault and replaced him with KK.  In that scenario the Habs would gain a lot more offence than what they'd give up defensively. 

Not certain KK is ready to shoulder the defensive workload that Danault has, and will again this season ... maybe in a couple of more years ... maybe ... we can hope his defence progresses to that stage ... but MB is VERY much making moves for THIS season ... I'll disagree that Domi stays Danault out yields "a lot more offence than what they'd give up defensively" ... but that is all a matter of opinion

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/16/2020 at 2:33 PM, Sir_Boagalott said:

 

You're totally right, but thats because the got rid of Domi.  You (b) is actually part of my argument for having kept Domi.  i.e. what does Danault think he's worth?  If it similar to what Domi signed for with CBJ then the Habs probably should kept Domi and traded Danault and replaced him with KK.  In that scenario the Habs would gain a lot more offence than what they'd give up defensively. 

 

Would they gain more offence.

 

Danault is establishing himself as a 50-55 point player.

 

Is Domi much better than that?  Do we think that 1 70 point season is the norm or an outlier.  Maybe hes slightly better and a 60-65 point guy.

 

That 10 points does not make up for Danaults defensive work which is great and where Domi is attrocious.  Matching top lines, the PK, important faceoffs, etc...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Would they gain more offence.

 

Danault is establishing himself as a 50-55 point player.

 

Is Domi much better than that?  Do we think that 1 70 point season is the norm or an outlier.  Maybe hes slightly better and a 60-65 point guy.

 

That 10 points does not make up for Danaults defensive work which is great and where Domi is attrocious.  Matching top lines, the PK, important faceoffs, etc...

 

Yes, but you are not taking the nuance of my suggestion into consideration.

 

I didnt say replace Domi with Danualt, I said keep Domi over Danault because KK could replace Danault, with Domi being the 2ndC.

 

Suzuki g 25  - 30

Domi       20 - 25

KK           20 - 25

            = 65 - 80

 

vs:

Suzuki g 25  - 30

KK           20 - 25

Danault    12 - 15

            = 57 - 60

 

Danault does get close to 40 assists.  However, out of all the C;s the Habs have, Danault is the only 1 that plays with 2 wingers that can score 30 goals.  Therefore, how many of his assist are actually earned vs gifted to him just by being on the ice with 2 30 goals scorers, with him just having touched the puck before 1 of them scored? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

 

Yes, but you are not taking the nuance of my suggestion into consideration.

 

I didnt say replace Domi with Danualt, I said keep Domi over Danault because KK could replace Danault, with Domi being the 2ndC.

 

Suzuki g 25  - 30

Domi       20 - 25

KK           20 - 25

            = 65 - 80

 

vs:

Suzuki g 25  - 30

KK           20 - 25

Danault    12 - 15

            = 57 - 60

 

Danault does get close to 40 assists.  However, out of all the C;s the Habs have, Danault is the only 1 that plays with 2 wingers that can score 30 goals.  Therefore, how many of his assist are actually earned vs gifted to him just by being on the ice with 2 30 goals scorers, with him just having touched the puck before 1 of them scored? 

 

Guess the question is whether Danault-Suzuki-KK saves up to 20 total goals ... I suspect they might ... plus, I doubt whichever of NS-MD-KK were to have played against other teams top lines would score as much as you project ... there is also the question of puck possession to consider ... Danault, going against the best centres for the most part, was still the only, centre between PD-NS-MD-KK that was over 50% on faceoffs

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

 

Yes, but you are not taking the nuance of my suggestion into consideration.

 

I didnt say replace Domi with Danualt, I said keep Domi over Danault because KK could replace Danault, with Domi being the 2ndC.

 

Suzuki g 25  - 30

Domi       20 - 25

KK           20 - 25

            = 65 - 80

 

vs:

Suzuki g 25  - 30

KK           20 - 25

Danault    12 - 15

            = 57 - 60

 

Danault does get close to 40 assists.  However, out of all the C;s the Habs have, Danault is the only 1 that plays with 2 wingers that can score 30 goals.  Therefore, how many of his assist are actually earned vs gifted to him just by being on the ice with 2 30 goals scorers, with him just having touched the puck before 1 of them scored? 

 

 

Danault's even strength points production is comparable to a number of top centres in the NHL.... he's not being gifted points because of his wingers, he is producing 5v5 at the same level as Bergeron, Tavares, Aho, Couturier, Barzal, Zibanejad, Pettersson, O'Reilly, Barkov etc... all of them within 5 points of each other at 5v5.  On a per minute basis, he's also right there. 

He's not being gifted points, cause all of those guys have similar wingers. 

 

I'm not buying the argument that he isn't a huge part of that line's success.  His defensive ability, and the fact he can get the puck, and transition to offence is a huge part of his line's offence.  You can't score if the other team has you pinned in your own end.  He's also underrated for his passing ability and positioning and hockey IQ in the offensive zone.  The guy isn't flashy, but on the whole, he's effective. 

I also don't like the idea of asking a 20 or 21 year old to take his defensive responsibility.  Thats a recipe for disaster in two ways

 

1) You are stunting the offensive growth of KK by asking him to focus on the defensive side of the puck so much.  That's not what I want for his development. 

2) You just can't expect a 20 year old to be as successful as Danault is at matching the other team's top lines. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

Danault's even strength points production is comparable to a number of top centres in the NHL.... he's not being gifted points because of his wingers, he is producing 5v5 at the same level as Bergeron, Tavares, Aho, Couturier, Barzal, Zibanejad, Pettersson, O'Reilly, Barkov etc... all of them within 5 points of each other at 5v5.  On a per minute basis, he's also right there. 

He's not being gifted points, cause all of those guys have similar wingers. 

 

I'm not buying the argument that he isn't a huge part of that line's success.  His defensive ability, and the fact he can get the puck, and transition to offence is a huge part of his line's offence.  You can't score if the other team has you pinned in your own end.  He's also underrated for his passing ability and positioning and hockey IQ in the offensive zone.  The guy isn't flashy, but on the whole, he's effective. 

I also don't like the idea of asking a 20 or 21 year old to take his defensive responsibility.  Thats a recipe for disaster in two ways

 

1) You are stunting the offensive growth of KK by asking him to focus on the defensive side of the puck so much.  That's not what I want for his development. 

2) You just can't expect a 20 year old to be as successful as Danault is at matching the other team's top lines. 

 

Totally agree ... but I suspect MB may want to wait to see how NS & KK perform this coming season before entering serious extension talks ... IMO that, and seeing the how 2021 "NHL economic" environment plays out, will be critical in establishing PD's value ... as is ... Habs have $16-ish million and need to add a 7th defenceman and 7 forwards ... KK and Lehkonen are RFAs, Tartar, Danault and Armia are UFAs (I assume Weal is a goner after next season, if not before) ... and they may need to let some players go to add new pieces (if needed)

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 

Totally agree ... but I suspect MB may want to wait to see how NS & KK perform this coming season before entering serious extension talks ... IMO that, and seeing the how 2021 "NHL economic" environment plays out, will be critical in establishing PD's value ... as is ... Habs have $16-ish million and need to add a 7th defenceman and 7 forwards ... KK and Lehkonen are RFAs, Tartar, Danault and Armia are UFAs (I assume Weal is a goner after next season, if not before) ... and they may need to let some players go to add new pieces (if needed)

 

In terms of least expendable.

 

KK at #1

Danault at #2,

Tatar 3,

Armia 4

Lehkonen 5

So that has to come into play in terms of contracts as well. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Danault can be replaced. Plekanec couldn’t be replaced, yet Danault replaced him, albeit not as well, and now we’re discussing the topic of who can replace Danault.

 

I also agree that his points come in large part as a result of who he is playing with.

 

Every single player that was listed there as being a comparable to Danault 5 on 5 also obtain 15-20+ power play points a year. They all have skill that Danault doesn’t possess. It essentially backs up the theory that he’s not a 1st line caliber center when all those other players are getting dozens of power play points, and he is the lone exception. Danault is a 2nd/3rd liner who is getting points because he’s playing with our top line players. Of course, some of it has to do with the fact that he tends to give it his all every game.

 

It’s all a moot argument in a sense though. Nick Suzuki is the team’s first line center and already amassed 14 points on the power play last year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole point of this setup we got going on right now is to have a formidable and deep top 9, none of the top 3 centers are expendable for the simple fact that the entire thing falls apart if you start plugging Evans and Poehling in there. If you plan to build a roster with a deep top 9 up front, a deep top 4 in the back, and the arguable deepest goalie depth, you have to go all in on that, the only expendables are your 4th liners and bottom pair D, i'm not sure why we are even contemplating anything else.

 

The only currently non expendable player in the top 9 I could see becoming expendable next season is Tatar, and only if Caufield looks ready to make some NHL noise. 

 

 

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

Danault can be replaced. Plekanec couldn’t be replaced, yet Danault replaced him, albeit not as well, and now we’re discussing the topic of who can replace Danault.

 

I also agree that his points come in large part as a result of who he is playing with.

 

Every single player that was listed there as being a comparable to Danault 5 on 5 also obtain 15-20+ power play points a year. They all have skill that Danault doesn’t possess. It essentially backs up the theory that he’s not a 1st line caliber center when all those other players are getting dozens of power play points, and he is the lone exception. Danault is a 2nd/3rd liner who is getting points because he’s playing with our top line players. Of course, some of it has to do with the fact that he tends to give it his all every game.

 

It’s all a moot argument in a sense though. Nick Suzuki is the team’s first line center and already amassed 14 points on the power play last year.

 

For me, Plex is the reason why I dont love Danault, because he's 80-90% as defensive, but 25-50% as offensive as Plex, yet he probably wants similar money.  Exactly like you say, Danault is incapable of doing what the other 14 top guys do on the PP, plus they all get 65-70+ pts.  I honestly dont understand the love affair with Danault.  He's a huge reason why the Habs PP sucks and ultimately that leads to them not making the playoffs.  I don't entirely blame Danault, but who thinks its a good idea to keep putting him out there?  CJ? KM?  MB?    . 

 

If Danault plays 3rdC with Armia and Leks they'd need to score 25 & 15 with Danault getting an assist on every one of their goals for him to get 40 a.  I highly doubt that Danault is a good enough of a passer that Armia will get 30-35 and Leks 20+ for him to get close to 40a.  Its not like their output will go way up because they're playing with an elite passer.  I wouldnt be surprised if Tatar get 30g+ and Gally 35g if they played with NS. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Danault is actually better than Plex was defensively.

 

Hes also way more than 25% of what Plex was offensively.  Plek had 2 big seaons (both of which with our best wingers) but the majority of the time was in the 50-55 point range danault is hitting now.  25% is silliness.

 

Also again 5v5 is where it matters.  At 5v5 he is just as good as all those centres i listed.  They will get paid more than him for the PP points, but he deserves a number with an AAV starting at 5.  Given inflation a number the same as what plek was getting in 2011 is pretty fair.

 

As for his offence falling off.  Our top 6 wingers are (in no order)

 

Tatar, Gallagher, toffoli, anderson, drouin, Armia

 

Hes getting a 30 goal potential winger no matter what, and considering his icetime, i think he ends up with 2 wingers at that level (though yes its possible armia is with him and he has one 30g potential guy and one 20g potential guy). He can also assist on goals by defencemen, on SHG and on goals on line changes... so no he doesnt only need to find his wingers to get the 35-40 assists to get his 50-55 points.

 

Hes going to play with two good wingers at 5v5 and hes going to play 18 minutes a night matching the other teams top line.  I dont see the points dropping off.

 

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

Danault can be replaced. Plekanec couldn’t be replaced, yet Danault replaced him, albeit not as well, and now we’re discussing the topic of who can replace Danault.

 

I also agree that his points come in large part as a result of who he is playing with.

 

Every single player that was listed there as being a comparable to Danault 5 on 5 also obtain 15-20+ power play points a year. They all have skill that Danault doesn’t possess. It essentially backs up the theory that he’s not a 1st line caliber center when all those other players are getting dozens of power play points, and he is the lone exception. Danault is a 2nd/3rd liner who is getting points because he’s playing with our top line players. Of course, some of it has to do with the fact that he tends to give it his all every game.

 

It’s all a moot argument in a sense though. Nick Suzuki is the team’s first line center and already amassed 14 points on the power play last year.

 

Sure Danault can be replaced.

 

Can he be replaced without giving up high quality assets to get another two way centre like him in trade, and what is the cost of the contract for his replacement?

 

Those are the questions that should be asked... its not about whether or not he can be replaced, its about whether its more cost effective to get rid of him and get a replacement or just keep him?  Everything is about managing assets. 

I firmly believe that at between 5 and 6 million AAV, its worth keeping him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

Sure Danault can be replaced.

 

Can he be replaced without giving up high quality assets to get another two way centre like him in trade, and what is the cost of the contract for his replacement?

 

Those are the questions that should be asked... its not about whether or not he can be replaced, its about whether its more cost effective to get rid of him and get a replacement or just keep him?  Everything is about managing assets. 

I firmly believe that at between 5 and 6 million AAV, its worth keeping him. 

It’s a rare thing for me on the Danault topic but I completely respect the way you have formulated your point and argument.

 

With that being said, I think it is important to note his lack of production on the powerpoay because while 5 on 5 is more important when discussing your conventional 1st line, 2nd line, 3rd line, etc., it shows to me a separation in offensive skill level compared to the other 1st line centers.
 

With that being said, it is a red flag to me that our first line center should accept a 5.5 million salary, whereas the others listed will be between 7-11 million per year. He is getting points 5 on 5 but Suzuki and KK would accumulate points playing with Gallagher and Tatar 5 on 5 as well. 
 

I am fine with the concept of keeping Danault if he is played in a secondary role. 

 

The reason this is a discussion as Link67 asked, is because Danault has already claimed that he wants to play in a primary offensive role, and he is better suited on the second or third line. 
 

And to get straight to the point, while it will be nice in theory to roll 3 lines, we will have 2 stronger lines this year regardless of that vision. The third line will be weaker, unless Suzuki plays there. In which case I’ll have other issues to bring up. 

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...