Detroit would do that

Calgary declines, we need an actual top 6 centre, not another defensive specialist 3C that wants to be a 2C

That seems VERY steep for Boeser, especially assuming Gally resigns there (but VAN has cap issues to work out so you never know)

Wings take that, but it seems like you have the cap space for him to be buried?

I was contemplating going to WPG for Copp and their 2020 1st (10 OA), but thought that Montreal would need a veteran center to anchor that 3rd line. Still tho, I think Danault would do well in CGY with higher end top 6 wingers.

More even strength assists than gaudreau this year and 3 less last year. 3c nice try bud

The trade was made because Boeser is younger and fits the age group of our up and coming centers and Gally gives VAN almost 2.1 million extra for this offseason to help them now. Apparently according to everyone else Domi has no value so I included him in this trade just because. Maybe without Domi the trade would be more fair ?

Danault has been putting up 50+ points on a non offensive Habs team. The guy finished 6th in Selke voting and also got some votes last season. His analytics are amongst some of the best in the league and he plays on the PP and PK.

Its still doubtful that MTL moves him, its gonna take a lot. That being said, I do agree that Danault behind Monahan would be very good for the Flames. This trade isn’t enough tho, switch Ryan for Bennett and its close.

Danault is super undervalued. My Capfriendly account may be new but I have been surfing the Armchair GM threads for years and for some reason nobody values him even tho he was literally 6th in Selke voting lol

If Danault is traded why exactly would we need Ryan? We could just sign Thompson as our 4C and move Evans or Poehling to 3C and make Ryan acquisition irrelevant.

We literally have Backlund playing 2C rn and he's just a slightly older Danault (woah he might get 5 less points per year). This doesn't solve our issues, we have enough defensive forwards that can play centre (Lindholm, Backlund, Ryan) we have literally no interest in Danault. He's not a 2C on a good team. Our problem is that our "Danault" is our 2C and we need to add someone who can bump him down the lineup. 6th in Selke voting doesn't make you worth a king's ransom lol, prior to this year Backlund had 3 straight years of top 15 finishes, including 4th and 8th (woah again, he finished 4th one year so that must mean he's better right?!?). The voting for the Selke is a joke, Matthews and Panarin somehow got 1st place votes and Mark Stone should have been top 2. Does he have trade value and is he good defensively? Sure, but he's a rental, and he won't be a 2C on a team that has legitimate cup aspirations. If the Flames trade our 1st it'll be to address a weakness, not add to a strength we arguably have too much of.

VAN decline.

I never said he would be a good fit. You said a 3c trying to play 2c. He is very good defensively and a top 5 or 7 defensive player yet alone centre who is on par with 99 point gaudreau in terms of even strength assists. If he put up 30 pp points like gaudreau he’d be a 80 point top 5 defensive centre.
So at his current production he is a very good 2c.

It’s well thought out by you, no question.

Humour me and say Stetcher and Juolevi = Feury and 2nd round pick. More less the value is pretty close. That leaves Boeser for Gally, Domi, 16th overall.

I don’t think VAN does Boeser for Domi and 16, nor Gally and 16, but somewhere the three for Boeser seems like a lot - and “a lot” is probably what it takes to move Boeser out of Vancouver.

Maybe less the 2nd round pick? Overall maybe that works better.

Imagine if the Canucks use 16th overall to move out bad deals, then sign Toffoli/Gallagher/Domi to go with Pettersson, Horvat and Miller. That’s a scary top 6.

I'd prefer my 2C get more than 12 goals a year. You're also discounting Johnny putting up 25 goals pretty reliably. If Danault can't make PP1 in Montreal, notably a bottom 10 PP team, why would he be able to in Calgary, or any other contender with a decent second line winger? It's silly to say he gets less PP points than a guy on PP1 when he's not good enough to be more than PP2, and then to add 20 points to his totals? Come on now. If he was that good he would be played in that role. I could slap anyone on PP1 and their production would increase, if they aren't there it's because they're not good enough to be there. I'm not saying he isn't good defensively and putting up 50 points is nice and all, but he's only an acceptable 2C on a bubble team, he'd only be a 3C on a true contender.

I said if he was better on the pp. gaudreau has very similar 5v5 numbers and isn’t half as good defensively. Not saying gaudreau isnt better Just pointing out that at 5v5 the most common and important time of the game their numbers are very close and danault wins faceoffs and plays d. Also I’d say vegas is a legit contender, no?

Vegas is also the only team that has 5 wingers that could play on the top line lol, and if you traded Danault for Stastny (who yeah, he's better than), he still wouldn't even be 2C over Glass for more than the first half of next year. You want your depth guys to be good defensively so that your top guys can get the offensive zone time. Danault is good at that and that makes him very useful to a contender/coach, but to pretend he can do both is just overrating him. He's not a Barkov/Couturier/Bergeron/RoR that can put up points and still be defensively responsible. He's got a strength, and the position where he will slot in to help a contender succeed is generally at 3C (this year's Vegas team might be the only exception but it won't be for long). I get that he's good at passing at even strength or whatever but he's not going to put up more than 50 points because he isn't good enough to get that PP time. If he puts up 50 mostly even strength points on the 3rd line, all that means is that he is a good 3C, his team would probably win if he's playing there, it doesn't mean that he automatically becomes a 2C. I'm going to assume he was mostly playing in a 1C role on Montreal (Tatar-Danault-Gallagher was generally the top line was it not? Ice time/line combinations/when I got the chance to watch the odd Habs game certainly indicated so) so it could even be argued that those numbers were inflated by playing with Montreal's best wingers (Tatar also had a career year) and his production on a 2nd line, and getting 2nd line minutes might actually be worse than it was this year.

Wings accept

If you want me to list every playoff team(top 16) where he is a 2c I can do that. My whole point is the following,
The most common and crucial part of the game is 5v5. At 5v5 he is matching high end offensive players while playing stellar defence. Meaning that at the most crucial part of the game he is a very good player. He doesn’t put up power play numbers but that doesn’t matter. For example the jets. He’d be the 2c. On the pp they have scheifele, laine, wheeler and Connor plus a d. They wouldn’t need him to get pp points. They need him to be good 5v5 which he is.

And yes he played with Tatar and gally, but those aren’t extreme offensive talents

I honestly think the Van trade makes both teams much better. Especially if Gallagher signs an extension. That extra 2.1 million could be used immediately in order to sign like you said TT and maybe they keep Markstrom. I really like it even tho I love me some Gallagher, I think its a good move for both teams.

What if I took out the 16 overall and included Eriksson in the deal (not sure if Eriksson is spelled right and im at work so I dont have time to Google his name lol)

Yeah, and that role (good defensively, matches top lines at even strength, maybe puts up ok numbers) is a good 3C on a contender? You could argue playing him over Hayes or Krejci, but I probably wouldn't (especially considering how good they were in the playoffs) and every other top 8 has an established top 2 centres that are clearly better than him. Teams I considered potential top 8 contenders that got upset in the play-in or first round: Caps, Pens, Oilers, Blues, Canes, Leafs. No fit there. Of those 14 teams, there's one where he would be the 2C (VGK, but he wouldn't be 2C next year), and MAYBE 2-3 (Bruins, Flyers, Canes, and all those teams are out funnily enough) where you could make the argument, but they'd prefer him in a defensive 3rd line role if they had him. Jets didn't even make the playoffs this year lol. Better yet though, find me a cup winning 2C he's better than. The worst in the last decade or so was probably what, Brad Richards on the 2015 Chicago team that could roll three lines filled with top-6 calibre players? Every other cup winning 2C has been clearly superior (Backstrom, Carter, Malkin, etc.). There's a reason for that, and the reason is the defensive player is the 3C on teams that win. I'm not saying he's not a good player, and I'm not even saying he can't handle the minutes, because he is and he can, but if he's going to be your 2C you're very unlikely to be a very good team. The biggest point is that if you reduce his minutes and the quality of his linemates (going from 1C to 2C or 3C) he'll be less effective at 5v5 offensively as well. He'll play less as a 2C than he did this year and it's reasonable to expect a corresponding production DROP not saying he should be a 70 point player lol. A team trading for him should want him as their 3C and that's not a bad thing, but to call him a good 2C is missing the mark on his value.

St. Louis last year and 15 Blackhawks. Now let’s look at top regular season teams. He’s a 2c on carolina, Florida, Columbus, vegas, Winnipeg, rangers, Minnesota, St. Louis, Flyers depending on who’s a centre

Just out of curiosity, which Blues centre is he better than, the 25 goal 65+ point Schenn or the literally better than him in every way RoR lol? I gave you Vegas and he's similar to Hayes and Trocheck but with less offensive upside so he'd probably slide down to 3C there (if Giroux is centre it's no contest he's at BEST the 3C), and I'd rather have Richards in the offensive zone tbh, but the Hawks could get away with having a similar calibre player because their 3rd line was Sharp-Vermette-Teravainen lol, even Vegas can't match that, and even if you were to take Danault over a former Conn Smythe winner, I . Every other team was not a playoff team. There's a difference between a 2C on a bubble team/pretender (what Danault could be) and a 2C on a contender (what he won't be). Calgary is already a pretender with Backlund at 2C, we're trying to improve, not stay the same, and any other team looking to improve/contend won't be trading for him to play 2C unless they have minimum 4 elite wingers. Danault is good, and a useful piece. He is not a gamechanger that takes your team from good to great.

LMAO lets use 1 year of Johnny's (his worst since entering the league) and compare it to the BEST YEAR of Danault's career?
Holy ****ing cherry pick on the stat line here. Johnny > Danault and its not even close anyone who says otherwise is **** hahaha MTL fans are the worst.

VAN decline.