Stars Stack Mailbag: Dallas collapses again to Calgary, plus your Lundkvist questions, and trade speculation

Your Dallas Stars questions, answered.

Another Calgary game, another loss — again in the waning minutes. I stand by my analysis of this topic from yesterday: two games is not a trend. Is three games? We’ll get to that in a bit.

For now I guess it’s worth devoting a few words to Game 21, which saw Dallas lose in overtime 4-3 to the Flames. The game itself was pretty decent. Had they won, the big story would be Mason Marchment’s resurgence. Or — shall we say — the return of Nashville Mason (in this this isn’t obvious, Nashville was the team Marchment debuted to, and what would turn out to be the highlight of his victory green career). Beyond just scoring two goals, he looked dangerous, making me re-think the whole Duchene Effect theory. Don’t look now but he also has 13 points in his last 16 games. Not bad, blue eyes.

Beyond Scott Wedgewood looking slippery (?) in net, the big story was yet another late-period boondoggle. I’ve only ever heard of that word and never actually looked it up; so apologies if I’m not using to correctly. The box score doesn’t tell the whole story since Calgary technically scored twice in the third period. The Flames commentators were convinced the puck bounced off Backlund’s leg before falling back to the ice and seemed to suggest that the refs ignored the puck hitting his leg after being grabbed. (Calgary has some lowkey power homers; they weren’t interested in explaining anything as they seemed more eager for hockey to continue in order to stop feeling frustrated.)

Nonetheless, Dallas couldn’t hold a third-period lead, and so now it’s a talking point. Except unlike the overtime discussion — largely a waste IMO — this is genuinely relevant. However, I think we’re missing the big picture. Late-period collapse or not, Dallas is a Cup favorite. And so far, we have three dominant narratives (narratives that fans have rightly picked up on):

• Slow starts to begin the year

• Inability to beat good teams

• Late-period collapses

These are not the kind of stories that should follow a Cup favorite. Granted, it’s missing all the positive takeaways, but that’s way too much on its own to warrant any sort of “this team is winning it all this year” juice from fans. Beyond that, we have a mailbag to get through!

The Mailbag

With Bichsel heading back to Sweden, who is the best player in CP right now who's name isn't Logan or Mavrik?

This one's easy: Matt Murray. You could argue that Murray has been JUST as important as Stankoven and Bourque. Texas is not a great defensive team, but Murray makes them look way better than they actually are. He's had a few off nights (the insane San Diego game being one of his exceptions) but when he's consistent, he's impenetrable.

Has Lian been asked about his reasoning on going back to Sweden? What was his answer?

I don't want to speculate even though that's exactly what I'll do. It's important to keep in mind that it's not like anybody ever said at the outset that Lian Bichsel would play the full year in Cedar Park. In fact, nobody seems to mention that for the longest time, where Bichsel would play to start the season was oddly hush hush. Beyond that, I think we're still moving past the perception of players exercising control of their own path.

Just look at GMs. They have total freedom (unless you work in Toronto) to make whatever decision they want, and as fans, we look beyond their volition and stick their decisions into buckets of Smart versus Stupid.

However, a player exercising their right still feels out of the blue. And no wonder. A goaltender can't even honor his wife's heritage without getting a shock to the collar. Fans (the bad kind) still give players shit for opening up about substance abuse, as Sam Girard and Jacuk Vrana have. So that's where I'll leave it: Bichsel is doing what he thinks is best. Maybe he misses home. Maybe he has a strong relationship with the Rogle’s coaching staff who helped develop Moritz Seider. Or maybe it's an internal decision; something that just felt right.

For Bichsel, this decision was about the present. His future with the team on the other hand is crystal clear.

What’s the deal with Nils. He’s there to be utilised and instead we bench him?

Coaches don't analyze players the way we do. Coaches analyze players from game-to-game, and from shift-to-shift. They manage for the present, not the future. The fact that this contradiction is taken as self-evident is precisely why I complain about NHL development, but that's neither here nor there. For now, it's worth respecting where DeBoer is coming from. Coaches want security. They want, inasmuch as they can approximate it, certainty. DeBoer can't be certain Lundkvist's miscues aren't representative of who he is. Whereas with Suter, he can be certain of his past. Because of that, their mistakes are framed in very different ways.

We’re seeing something similar in Toronto. Why doesn’t Sheldon Keefe trust Nicholas Robertson? Listen to his response after their loss to Pittsburgh:

Asked about a different goal against late in the second period, Keefe switched gears, focused on the second goal and, it would appear, Robertson’s error.

“To me, the tougher one to give up is the second one. We had full possession of that puck. Our D gets it in our forward’s hands, and we have a chance for a very clean breakout. Instead, we give it back to the defenceman again and compound the problem. It ends up in our net. To me, that is the game right there,” Keefe said.

So that’s the development dilemma. Coaches play for their jobs. GMs play prospects for their future. Is that on hockey for not developing a delivery system for these transitions? Hell yea. But until that changes, it’s gonna fall on Lundkvist’s shoulders to earn the coach’s trust, regardless of the coaching hypocrisy. Sounds like a lot for one, young player doesn’t it? You bet. And that’s why NHL “development” is a sham. (Hell even an NHL scout intimating something similar to Sean at D Magazine yesterday.)

i see Nils make mistakes (5 last game) but I see Hakka make 3 a shift and yet Nils sits for 3/4's of the 3rd. Can you explain what I am missing?

Interestingly, the analytics agree with the coaching staff. Hakanpaa helps suppress shot quality (xGA/60) whereas Lundkvist does not.

Of course, this graph, raises the question: but what about literally everything else that Lundkvist does better — including, oddly enough, keeping shot attempts down? The answer: because Lindell-Hakanpaa is a more effective pair. 54 percent expected goal share for 23-2 versus 47 percent for 23-5. (Harley-Hakanpaa was surprisingly worse than both at 41 percent expected goal share).

How likely is it they use some of their forward depth to target an impact D-man? Between faksa, Smith, steel, dellandrea and guys on the farm, seems like they can afford to deal from a position of strength to bolster the D

Faksa should be the target, especially if they expect to take back cap. But what in Nill’s history, explicit or otherwise, has ever indicated he’s willing to trade Faksa? I wouldn’t be surprised if it happened since it’s the only way to make the cap work, but I wouldn’t expect it to either. Perhaps — assuming Nills gets a little creative — the eventual move is to trade Dellandrea and get the other team to eat some salary.

This would work for a lot of teams. Dellandrea is a first round pick. A lot of other teams will already have scouting reports on him, and Stankoven and Bourque make clear how expendable he is. So it allows Nill to give up a first rounder without giving up a first rounder. Do I like it? No. I really believe Dellandrea will be a solid middle six forward. But it’s a way better deal than most teams will be able to offer, and all for a player who is pro ready.

Do you think there is a glaring defensive disability on the Benn, Johnston, Dadonov line, and if so what would you change? Benn and Johny have been fine, but I’m not sure how well Dadonov is complimenting then right now.

I talked about this yesterday in my video breakdown of Dallas' recent late-period collapses. Benn has been Dallas' worst defensive forward for some time, except he's not just worse, but radioactive. It's possible he's dragging down the whole line. However, Dadonov has never rated as an elite defensive forward either.

Because of this, I do wonder how long the leash is on this line. They're being outscored 7 to 6, with a 46 percent share of shot attempts. Their expected goals against is 2.87, by far a team worst. So why are we watching them drown? The fourth line has a ton of good options to experiment with. Just saying: this should be a bigger story, but the residue of the Bennasaine and Johnston’s productive year is obscuring what this group fails to do at even strength.

How reliant are the Stars on rush offense? I've watched PDB in Vegas and the goal scoring dried up in the playoffs from the lack of rush chance. I would hate to see the same thing happen here.

Really good question. Especially since it means I wasn't crazy for writing about how DeBoer could affect their rush attack before the season despite Reddit telling me that my story was an example of what happens when "writers run out of stories to write" or some BS.

For the people that are new here, rush offense is critical. Most goals are scored within 7 seconds of entering the zone, which puts a premium on breaking into the zone with control. DeBoer himself values it. As for Vegas, their story was simple: under DeBoer and Spott, their power play ranked 19th of 25 teams during their 39-game tenure. In Dallas, it’s very different: a blueline that can’t attack up ice consistently. Will the rush chances dry up as the competition gets harder, and Lindell and Hakanpaa are playing close to 20 minutes a night? You bet. Which is what makes this deadline all the more critical.

If there is a prime trade candidate for trade, who is it?

Hell yea. And he’ll block pucks with his face to defend.

Tanev is exactly what Dallas needs: a territorial shutdown defender — someone who doesn’t just passively defend, but who creates the other way despite not being able to create chances in the offensive zone.

However, Tanev won’t be cheap. A ton of teams will be in on the Tanev sweepstakes, and none of them can afford him without throwing cap back the other way. Detroit is probably the only team that can take him without needing to do some cap gymnastics to take him on, but they already have Jeff Petry and Seider on the right, so who knows.

Name a trade that you would consider including Logan Stankoven or Mavrik Bourque in (if one exists). It would be negligent for an opposing team with any asset of note to not include one of these two in discussions.

Ooh. Spicy AF. I love it!

I got one: Noah Dobson.

Granted, I wasn’t one of the marks who thought Dobson or Bouchard were better than Quinn Hughes. He hasn’t been lights out as a strong, territorial defender. Is he putting up points? You bet. But he hasn’t developed into a full three-zone defender. Nonetheless, I think you absolutely chance it next to Heiskanen. Bourque would make the most sense in this case since the Islanders need offense, and they need centers.

Dobson would also line up with Dallas’ big dump (of cap that is) in 2025-2026 when Benn, Lindell, Faksa, and Suter’s contracts all fall off. He’s only $4 million against the cap until then. It wouldn’t be the first young defender Lou was willing to part with tax free (cough, Devon Toews). I also sets up Dallas to have Heiskanen-Dobson and Harley-Bichsel as your top 4. That seems, uhh, good.

However, Islanders still have to take back cap, and I’m not sure how highly teams think of Bourque. His season in the AHL certainly have their attention, but versus a big, top four offensive defenceman? I don’t think it’s crazy. Chychrun’s another dude I’d trade one of the super twins for, especially with his experience on the right side.

Let me just say that there are few trades that interest me on this front. I don’t believe they’re untouchable, but when talking about a prospect’s value, their cheap cost in a flat cap world is a big part of it, which is why you never see these players traded. Doesn’t mean they shouldn’t — just that the cap is always part of any equation involving a trade for a roster player with term.

When was the last time Dallas scored on a 5-on-3?

They only had one 5on3 goal last year, so it’s been awhile. It also doesn’t come up often so I wouldn’t worry too much, even if it is kind of annoying.

I’m frustrated and pissed, David… three blown leads in 7 games.

Correlation is not causation, but I’m starting to wonder if there’s not something to the fact that as the games get more intense as opponents try to crawl back into the game, Dallas shortens their blueline to basically four players.

I mean just look at Thomas Harley and Nils Lundkvist’s shifts in the third period, first versus Calgary last night…

Winnipeg the game before…

And Calgary the game before that…

I’m sure Miro Heiskanen can handle it. (He doesn’t lead the league in time-on-ice per game) In the same way he can “handle” playing his weakside…which is to say that it doesn’t matter what a player can or can’t handle — what matters is whether they’re fully maximized. Heiskanen seemed to struggle in the third period, making a few uncharacteristic turnovers and board rims.

Beyond that, if you’re not gonna trust your bottom pair in November, then you sure as hell won’t trust them in April. Both feed one another, so Nill’s got work to do, and DeBoer has some trust to gain.