#24 Phillip Danault 2017-18

[habs_93]

#24 Phillip Danault

 @phildanault

Position: Left Wing
Shoots: Left
Birthplace: Victoriaville, QC, CAN 
Birth date: 24 February 1993
Age: 24
Height: 6' 1"
Weight: 193 lbs
Drafted by: Chicago
Draft Year: 2011 Round 1 (26th Overall)

Archive 2016-17

Stats | NHL.com | Contract Info

OwnThePuck HERO Chart (http://ownthepuck.blogspot.com/):

[ramcharger440]

Should be our #2-3 center this year.

[RuudNuij]

I like what he brings, .. keep him playing with the better guys, and who knows, .. we might be a contender.

[maas_art]

On 6/28/2017 at 4:23 AM, ramcharger440 said:

Should be our #2-3 center this year.

Agreed & would be great in either role I think.  He did incredibly well playing way over his head last year. Put him in a position where he can succeed and I think he'll be terrific. Picking him up for 2 expiring UFA was one of MB's best moves tbh. 

[BigTed3]

8 hours ago, maas_art said:

Agreed & would be great in either role I think.  He did incredibly well playing way over his head last year. Put him in a position where he can succeed and I think he'll be terrific. Picking him up for 2 expiring UFA was one of MB's best moves tbh. 

Really nice find. But I think it's a mistake to peg him into the top 6 again. He had a nice start playing on the 4th line with Byron and Mitchell, when that line was winning its match-ups against the other team's 4th lines. And he had some good stretches with Pacioretty and Radulov. But if you look at the last 26 games of the regular season, he put up only 3 goals and 10 points. He had only 4 goals the last 40 games of the season. And he had no goals and 2 assists in the 6 games in the playoffs. And all that despite playing on the top line with the two best wingers.

I don't think I saw Danault take too many nights off, he skated well, he got some chances, he played well defensively... but he's not good enough offensively to be a top 6 center. Galchenyuk got torn apart for not being good enough defensively to be a center, but if you want to be a top 6 center, you also need to be able to score, and Danault wasn't very good at that. I think he started the year underrated, but I also think people overrated him towards the end because we pictured him as being a pleasant surprise and over-achiever. For a 3rd/4th line player, he was fantastic. But that shouldn't cloud the fact that he was not productive as a top 6 player.

I would be 100% fine with Danault being the 3C. He's made me a believer that he can replace the work we were getting from Eller. But I don't see him as a #2 and certainly not a #1 going forward. It's a mistake to believe he can be a top 6 center and it's a mistake from MB to have not addressed the need for two players to play ahead of him.

[Habberwacky]

I think Dannault may shine a little brighter with Drouin and can allow a player like Drouin to take a few more chances, With the likelihood of Bergevin getting a top centre diminishing I hope he gets a chance to play alongside Drouin until he shows he can't.

[maas_art]

18 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Really nice find. But I think it's a mistake to peg him into the top 6 again. He had a nice start playing on the 4th line with Byron and Mitchell, when that line was winning its match-ups against the other team's 4th lines. And he had some good stretches with Pacioretty and Radulov. But if you look at the last 26 games of the regular season, he put up only 3 goals and 10 points. He had only 4 goals the last 40 games of the season. And he had no goals and 2 assists in the 6 games in the playoffs. And all that despite playing on the top line with the two best wingers.

I don't think I saw Danault take too many nights off, he skated well, he got some chances, he played well defensively... but he's not good enough offensively to be a top 6 center. Galchenyuk got torn apart for not being good enough defensively to be a center, but if you want to be a top 6 center, you also need to be able to score, and Danault wasn't very good at that. I think he started the year underrated, but I also think people overrated him towards the end because we pictured him as being a pleasant surprise and over-achiever. For a 3rd/4th line player, he was fantastic. But that shouldn't cloud the fact that he was not productive as a top 6 player.

I would be 100% fine with Danault being the 3C. He's made me a believer that he can replace the work we were getting from Eller. But I don't see him as a #2 and certainly not a #1 going forward. It's a mistake to believe he can be a top 6 center and it's a mistake from MB to have not addressed the need for two players to play ahead of him.

For sure it would be nice to have in in the 3rd line role - but unless either MB gets us a top 6 centre like RNH,  or Plekanec has a bounce-back year, Im not sure it will happen.

I do believe either chucky or drouin can play centre but im not sure we can use both in that role (thats two lines without a strong defensive centre). I do think there's an outside chance pleks can bounce back - and i also think its quite likely MB will bring in another centre, so maybe we'll get our wish but for right now, id still rank Danault as one of our best 2 options in that role. 

[BigTed3]

4 hours ago, maas_art said:

For sure it would be nice to have in in the 3rd line role - but unless either MB gets us a top 6 centre like RNH,  or Plekanec has a bounce-back year, Im not sure it will happen.

I do believe either chucky or drouin can play centre but im not sure we can use both in that role (thats two lines without a strong defensive centre). I do think there's an outside chance pleks can bounce back - and i also think its quite likely MB will bring in another centre, so maybe we'll get our wish but for right now, id still rank Danault as one of our best 2 options in that role. 

I don't disagree that Danault is one of our best options right now and I completely believe that he will be played in the top 6 to start the year. But that doesn't mean he is good enough to play there. The absence of a true first-pairing LHD doesn't make Alzner or Schlemko a top-tier defenceman and it doesn't mean we should be accepting of using them there and the same goes for Danault. He's not a suitable top 6 centerman on any contending team. MB needs to fix the problem. He's had 6 years to find centers and he hasn't. He's had 6 years to improve the D and he's made it slower, older, and less skilled. He continues to stockpile a rotating cast of grit for the 4th line without addressing the actual things holding us back. So just as it wasn't Desharnais' fault that he wasn't a top 6 center, so too is it the case for Danault. He's a very good 3C, but to use him in the top 6 long-term is setting him up for failure IMO.

[habs1952]

6 hours ago, maas_art said:

For sure it would be nice to have in in the 3rd line role - but unless either MB gets us a top 6 centre like RNH,  or Plekanec has a bounce-back year, Im not sure it will happen.

I do believe either chucky or drouin can play centre but im not sure we can use both in that role (thats two lines without a strong defensive centre). I do think there's an outside chance pleks can bounce back - and i also think its quite likely MB will bring in another centre, so maybe we'll get our wish but for right now, id still rank Danault as one of our best 2 options in that role. 

Plekanec will not be having a bounce back year. 

[kinot-2]

3 minutes ago, habs1952 said:

Plekanec will not be having a bounce back year. 

I'm not so sure (call me naive) , but with a $6 mil. hit, and at 34 yrs. he "should" try to have a good year. It would depend on his line-mates. If he was put with grinders (which we have a LOT of), he will undoubtedly put up less numbers. If he had better wingmen, then he should bounce back, otherwise, he's gone to Europe.

[maas_art]

2 hours ago, habs1952 said:

Plekanec will not be having a bounce back year. 

He looked a whole lot better under Julien and he's only had one really bad year (had 54 and 60 point seasons the 2 years prior to last year).  He had incredibly bad puck luck last year too.  

So while i wouldnt bet money he'll bounce back, i really dont think a 40-50 point season would be completely out of nowhere. 

[Habs=stanleycup]

3 hours ago, habs1952 said:

Plekanec will not be having a bounce back year. 

Agreed. Plekanec is a total waste of $6 million. He is way past his prime IMO. Even a coach like CJ will be unable to change that.

[habs1952]

15 hours ago, kinot-2 said:

I'm not so sure (call me naive) , but with a $6 mil. hit, and at 34 yrs. he "should" try to have a good year. It would depend on his line-mates. If he was put with grinders (which we have a LOT of), he will undoubtedly put up less numbers. If he had better wingmen, then he should bounce back, otherwise, he's gone to Europe.

You are NAIVE!!! 

[kinot-2]

11 hours ago, habs1952 said:

You are NAIVE!!! 

Ya didn't have to take me literally. 

[CaptWelly]

On ‎8‎/‎2‎/‎2017 at 0:33 AM, maas_art said:

He looked a whole lot better under Julien and he's only had one really bad year (had 54 and 60 point seasons the 2 years prior to last year).  He had incredibly bad puck luck last year too.  

So while i wouldnt bet money he'll bounce back, i really dont think a 40-50 point season would be completely out of nowhere. 

I agree we now have additional wingers whom could make a decent 3rd line. I also think that he could reach 40-50 points and still be a valuable defensive center.

[BizarreReverend]

As for Plekanec, if he posts between 30-35 points and plays solid defensive hockey, I'll be happy. The issue is arises because that's exactly what I'd hope for Danault to be--a competent third line center who gets some offensive assignments now and again.

[BigTed3]

38 minutes ago, BizarreReverend said:

As for Plekanec, if he posts between 30-35 points and plays solid defensive hockey, I'll be happy. The issue is arises because that's exactly what I'd hope for Danault to be--a competent third line center who gets some offensive assignments now and again.

Two problems though:

1. Hard to pay a 30-point guy 6 million to play the 3rd-4th line. Especially hard to do it when you have no top 6 centers to replace what you thought you would get from Plekanec.

2. He and Danault both play the same role. They're both best suited to be the 3C. But again, no  top 6 centers unless you're playing AG there. Both Pleky and Danault can't be the 3C, so who goes where?

[Habs_Hockey_Nutz]

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

Two problems though:

1. Hard to pay a 30-point guy 6 million to play the 3rd-4th line. Especially hard to do it when you have no top 6 centers to replace what you thought you would get from Plekanec.

2. He and Danault both play the same role. They're both best suited to be the 3C. But again, no  top 6 centers unless you're playing AG there. Both Pleky and Danault can't be the 3C, so who goes where?

I believe Plekanec deserves the chance to rebound and therefore play top six minutes... With Pleks and Danault as 1-2 there are others that can play 3-4 imo... and Galchenyuk playing right-wing is still not a bad idea in the top six

[ChiLla]

2 minutes ago, Habs_Hockey_Nutz said:

I believe Plekanec deserves the chance to rebound and therefore play top six minutes... With Pleks and Danault as 1-2 there are others that can play 3-4 imo... and Galchenyuk playing right-wing is still not a bad idea in the top six

I agree, if they still think Galchenyuk can't play center, that's probably our best option. We're on the hook for his 6M either way, so why not give him every chance to succeed and maybe even flip him for a decent draft pick at the deadline if we're out of the playoff race, which isn't that unrealistic. There will be injuries and we have very little depth to begin with.

[ramcharger440]

Meh, one more year we will get what we get out of him if he knocks it out of the park great if not he will be gone next year.

[kinot-2]

2 hours ago, ramcharger440 said:

Meh, one more year we will get what we get out of him if he knocks it out of the park great if not he will be gone next year.

Oh,,,,,,,but ramcharger,,,,,,,,,,,,,he's a Francophone. That alone gives him at least a 2 year extension. < sarcasm implied > 

[ramcharger440]

On 9/5/2017 at 10:28 PM, kinot-2 said:

Oh,,,,,,,but ramcharger,,,,,,,,,,,,,he's a Francophone. That alone gives him at least a 2 year extension. < sarcasm implied > 

OOPS! I posted this in the wrong thread! it was for Pleky's thread.

[maas_art]

I hope that he is put in a more suitable position this year.  One of MB's best moves was snagging him for two UFAs who have fizzled since.   He is clearly not a #1 centre but should be a serviceable #2 or, better still, an elite #3.  The idea of a 3rd line of  Lehkonen/Byron - Danault - Shaw  makes me very happy. 

[habs1952]

6 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I hope that he is put in a more suitable position this year.  One of MB's best moves was snagging him for two UFAs who have fizzled since.   He is clearly not a #1 centre but should be a serviceable #2 or, better still, an elite #3.  The idea of a 3rd line of  Lehkonen/Byron - Danault - Shaw  makes me very happy. 

Maybe, after losing Eller, Danault should have been/should be groomed as our next Plekanec.

[maas_art]

37 minutes ago, habs1952 said:

Maybe, after losing Eller, Danault should have been/should be groomed as our next Plekanec.

Yeah it really depends who our top 1 or 2 centremen are.   I have a feeling Drouin or Chucky will earn one spot (the other will be left wing behind Patches) and I think they're going to try to land a guy like Duchene to take the second spot.  That slides Danault down to #3.     If we dont add to our roster though, im ok going with   Drouin/Galchenyuk - Danault - Plekanec as our top 3.