Story Summary
Phillip Danault has been put forward as a short-term extension candidate for the Montreal Canadiens, with Shaun Starr and Marco D’Amico arguing that the club should soon open discussions with the pending unrestricted free agent. No negotiations have started, and there is no indication that an agreement is close.
The case is built around centre depth rather than a long-range commitment. D’Amico suggested that a two-year deal could make sense at the right price, arguing that Danault’s intelligence could allow him to remain effective into his mid-30s. He also pointed to Danault’s combination with Jake Evans and his value in set situations, particularly in the playoffs.
Their discussion did not present an extension as a completed plan. It was an argument that Montreal should retain an experienced option while its longer-term picture at centre continues to take shape.
Key Facts
- Phillip Danault is a pending unrestricted free agent, and Montreal have not yet started contract talks with him.
- Marco D’Amico argued that a two-year contract could make sense for Danault if the price is right.
- D’Amico said he believes Danault is intelligent enough to play well into his mid-30s.
- D’Amico identified Danault’s combination with Jake Evans and his value in set situations as reasons to consider an extension.
- Shaun Starr and D’Amico discussed Alex Newhook, Michael Hage, Owen Beck, Oliver Kapanen and Nick Suzuki while considering Montreal’s centre depth.
- D’Amico said the Canadiens should have extra centres available so an injury does not force an unready player from Laval into the lineup.
IHM Discussion
This is not a report of a contract negotiation, let alone an agreement. It is a case for Montreal to begin one. That distinction matters, because D’Amico’s proposed two-year term is a view on how the Canadiens could manage a familiar player’s pending free agency rather than evidence of the club’s position or Danault’s asking price.
The argument rests on the value of keeping choices open down the middle. D’Amico questioned whether Alex Newhook is a long-term centre, while Starr and D’Amico also discussed where Owen Beck may ultimately fit. Michael Hage was raised as a possible future second-line centre, but only on the assumption that he reaches that role. Oliver Kapanen and Nick Suzuki were also mentioned in the conversation.
In that context, Danault is framed as a bridge rather than a player who would block every younger option. The proposed short term is central to the idea: it would preserve an experienced centre while allowing the club’s longer-term mix to become clearer. D’Amico’s view was that Montreal are not sufficiently deep or established at centre to be comfortable losing Danault in the short term.
There is still a substantial gap between that reasoning and a deal. Any extension remains a possibility, not a transaction.
Why It Matters
Centres give a coach flexibility when injuries or uneven form disrupt a lineup. D’Amico’s point was not simply that Montreal need another name on a depth chart; it was that carrying several players capable of playing centre reduces the risk of moving someone into a demanding role before he is ready.
Danault’s potential value, in this argument, is therefore tied to specific situations as well as depth. D’Amico cited his intelligence, his work with Jake Evans and the importance of set plays in playoff hockey. Those are reasons to explore a short-term arrangement, but they do not establish what Montreal’s eventual decision will be.
The practical question is whether the club see enough value in that experience to open talks now, and whether the eventual cost fits what they are prepared to commit. Until both sides engage, the discussion remains an informed proposal rather than a developing negotiation.
IHM Market Outlook
The market signal is limited but clear: Danault’s pending unrestricted free agency creates a decision point for Montreal, and the suggested route is a short contract rather than a major long-term commitment. D’Amico specifically proposed two years if the price is right.
Nothing in the discussion establishes Danault’s market value, competing interest or the Canadiens’ internal budget. It also does not indicate that either side has exchanged terms. The only reported status is that talks have not started, with D’Amico expecting the Canadiens to begin engaging their unrestricted free agents soon.
That leaves Montreal with a straightforward choice in principle, even if the details would be harder: begin discussions on a limited-term extension or allow the pending free-agent situation to continue without a deal. At present, neither outcome has been confirmed.
Mini Q&A
Have the Canadiens started contract talks with Phillip Danault?
No. Discussions have not started, although D’Amico said the Canadiens should soon begin engaging their unrestricted free agents.
What kind of deal has been suggested for Danault?
D’Amico suggested that a two-year contract could make sense if the price is right, but no offer or agreement has been reported.
Why is Danault being discussed as an extension candidate?
D’Amico pointed to Montreal’s centre depth, Danault’s intelligence, his work with Jake Evans and his value in set situations.
Coach Mark Comment
The Danault-Evans combination is the part of this conversation that has real on-ice texture. When two players have already shown they can work together in set situations, an extension is not only about filling a future vacancy at centre. It can preserve a pairing a coach knows can be used when the game becomes more structured and every face-off or restart carries extra weight.
That does not mean Montreal must sign Danault, and a two-year term is only a suggestion. But it explains why a short deal can appeal: the club would be retaining a known piece of its hockey rather than asking an emerging player to reproduce that understanding immediately.
What Comes Next
The next checkpoint is whether Montreal begin discussions with Danault and their other unrestricted free agents, as D’Amico suggested should happen soon. Until there is a reported opening of talks or an agreed contract, Danault’s future remains unresolved.
IHM Final View
Danault’s possible extension is a sensible subject for debate because it connects immediate centre depth with Montreal’s longer-term planning. The proposed solution is deliberately modest: a short deal, at an acceptable price, for a player D’Amico believes can still contribute in important situations.
For now, however, this is advocacy rather than evidence of movement. Montreal have not started talks with Danault, and there is no confirmed offer, term or financial framework. The story is whether the Canadiens decide that keeping him is worth turning that argument into a negotiation.