Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Signing] Kings sign Phillip Danault


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, canucklehead44 said:

Why are people comparing him to Sutter?

 

In the three years leading up to his 4.3 million dollar contract in Vancouver he averaged .37 points per game and had poor underlying defensive stats.

 

Danault has averaged .6 points per game (nearly double Sutter) the last 3 seasons and has much better underlying numbers. 
 

Even if we put them as equal defensively and look straight at numbers, over 82 games you would be paying Sutter $143k per point vs $112k for Danault. The cap has also increased 15% so If you tack that on we paid Sutter ~5 million or $164k per point, a 47% premium.

 

I am not saying Danault is a good contract, just nowhere near Sutter bad. To be in line we would have given Sutter about 2.9 million. 
 

As for their current contracts they aren’t in the same realm and not at all worth comparing. But bang for buck Sutter is a better deal on his new contract, worse on his old contract. 

 

what?

not a fan of making claims like this - one-liner dropped in as a claim - with zero qualification.

can you explain how you arrive at this 'poor underlying defensive stats' claim?

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2021 at 3:58 PM, oldnews said:

what?

not a fan of making claims like this - one-liner dropped in as a claim - with zero qualification.

can you explain how you arrive at this 'poor underlying defensive stats' claim?

Perhaps I was a bit unfair. I like Sutter, but he simply made too much for what he brought. Whether underlying stats or point totals I think it is silly for people to act like Danault contract is so horrible while Sutter’s was fine.  I don’t have my paid subscription anymore to pull up the numbers, but here are a few notes from articles at the time and card from the last 3 seasons. By the way I loved the new contract:

 

561C6044-B443-4CC8-A5C6-FAD48AE1A9CC.jpeg

FC25D2D0-7594-41BF-B578-C179D39593CB.jpeg

61CBF52F-CD28-4E78-BF65-6AB3FB47D7B2.jpeg

8D6DAFC4-079D-4B10-BE9E-098AE73031A7.jpeg

Edited by canucklehead44
  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, canucklehead44 said:

Perhaps I was a bit unfair. I like Sutter, but he simply made too much for what he brought. I don’t have my paid subscription anymore to pull up the numbers, but here are a few notes from articles at the time: 

 

561C6044-B443-4CC8-A5C6-FAD48AE1A9CC.jpeg

FC25D2D0-7594-41BF-B578-C179D39593CB.jpeg

61CBF52F-CD28-4E78-BF65-6AB3FB47D7B2.jpeg

that is some absolutely horrible hero-chart quality nonsense / 'material' wadr.  misleading, cherry-picked negative value pseudo-'analytics' at it's worst.

 

but I can't disagree with you, yourself - that the frequently injured Sutter wasn't able to live up to his contract....which is quite different than denying the quality of player he was when acquired and/or not injured....

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, oldnews said:

that is some absolutely horrible hero-chart quality nonsense / 'material' wadr.  misleading, cherry-picked negative value pseudo-'analytics' at it's worst.

 

but I can't disagree with you, yourself - that the frequently injured Sutter wasn't able to live up to his contract....which is quite different than denying the quality of player he was when acquired and/or not injured....

Haha you are hilarious dude, I love it 
 

Sutter was a fine bottom 6 warrior who is/was a solid penalty killer but isn’t the selke level shut down specialist he was made out and paid to be. But you are right - the injuries really hampered his value.

Edited by canucklehead44
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...