2024-2025 Dallas Stars in-depth chart: rough thoughts on a rough draft

Let's get down to (future) business.

At last, we can finally start talking about the path ahead.

The 2024-2025 Dallas Stars will be an interesting mural of contradictory elements. They replaced Chris Tanev with spare parts, but they have some spare parts who might make the blueline better (Lian Bichsel). They lost Joe Pavelski, but they gained a rookie to take his potential place (Mavrik Bourque). The roster took a step back from the team who beat two former Cup winners in this year’s playoffs but some of their most important players will take crucial steps forward (Wyatt Johnston and Logan Stankoven). So what does it all mean?

In many ways, I think it sets up Dallas to be a quiet contender. Despite being in back-to-back Western Conference Finals, the public will largely see them as a sidebar against the list of serious threats to Florida’s throne, feeling like they’ve “run out of ammo.” And so the focus will be on Edmonton, Vegas, and probably even Vancouver (full-blooded pretenders last year, but admittedly I like their offseason moves) more than the Stars. After all, “they lost Tanev and Pavelski” pundits will say as if the analysis begins and ends there. With no obvious Tanev and Pavelski replacement, this is clearly a downgrade.

I’ve exhausted my own thoughts about why this is simply incorrect framing. Brand it “copium,” as one redditor called my recent article, if you prefer, but I stand by my latest work as analysis rather than apologetics. (I feel like the same people calling me out were the same ones criticizing me for “never played the game” when I was leaning into Rick Bowness, but hey—polluted water under the bridge.)

Part of my approach to coverage is the same as my approach to all things in life: a healthy embrace of the struggle (Epictetus being the most influential philosopher in my life). Whether I’m right or wrong is not what interests me. What interests me is struggling with ideas, and discovering where it leads in practical terms, even if it means starting from theoretical places. Dumba and Lyubushkin aren’t half the defender that Tanev is, but does Dallas have pieces in place that can make their presence work in a way that doesn’t hurt the team defense? Pavelski leaves behind a lot of points, but is it possible for residual offense to offset such a loss, if not enhance the team offense in some ways?

We’re a little off-topic, and in point of fact, I have no idea where I’m going with this. I guess what I’m saying is that if I don’t always sound clear about my opinions of Dallas’ future, the moves Jim Nill made, and the players themselves — it’s because I’m still working through them. In the end, the simplest analysis will likely be the correct analysis: Dallas got worse, and so will their fate next year. But everything about this assessment bugs me, not because it’s wrong, but because we’ve been too quick to call it the correct one. But that’s just me…

Where were we? Oh right. Dallas’ depth chart: 1.0. Also, be sure to subscribe if you haven’t already. We’re still on a three-posts-a-week schedule through August, and still on track to meet your pucksick needs. Surely I’m not the only one.

The rough draft

I suspect this is the roster you’ll see opening night.

It covers all the bases:

• Reinvigorated top line

• Bourque/Stankoven with an existing chemistry

• Offensive depth remains

• Blueline top four is the safest arrangement

• Et cetera

On the forwards

Even though this might be one of my least favorite iterations of Dallas’ lineup, that’s an elite group. Robertson with Hintz and Johnston have a history. In 111 minutes together last season, they posted an expected goal share of 82 percent, outscoring their opposition 5 to 0 (!). No other trio in the NHL came close. In fact, take away all the depth lines (it’s pretty common for smaller lines to be a strong possession group), and the next closest is Aleksander Barkov with Carter Verhaeghe and Sam Reinhart at 68 percent.

I wouldn’t expect that line to post those kind of numbers through a whole season. But I also wouldn’t be surprised if they hovered around those numbers. We’ve already seen what Dallas is capable of when the top line is firing on all cylinders. Now imagine that line, except even better. A top line laying waste to opposing defenses would pave the road, allowing Pete DeBoer to shortcut matchups.

The x-factor in all of this is, of course, Bourque. I’ve always liked him as a player. When Dallas selected him in 2020, I was ecstatic. For two years, he’s been on the cusp. It was really January when my gut said “yea this dude is for real.”

By that point, Bourque was revealing all of the added dimensions to his game: the surprising sturdiness in the corners and along the wall, the added speed, and a playmaking profile that continued adding layers. By then I was convinced.

Sticking him next to is former teammate alongside Benn makes a lot of intuitive sense. We’ll do more iterations of these depth charts later on, so I don’t want to start talking about alternatives. For now, I don’t see any reason why this wouldn’t work. On the surface, it’s definitely a change. That’s what makes him an x-factor given Dallas’ aspirations. However advanced you think Bourque is, he’s a step down from Johnston, not to mention — a very different profile.

However, just as the refrain “well Stankoven’s not Johnston” didn’t mean anything before he made the jump, the same is true of Bourque. Different players that do different things at a very high level, and thus not instructive of anything. What’s interesting to note about that comparison is that Johnston has become a certified shooter in the NHL. It is not, however, part of his original profile. Bourque has done something similar, albeit at a lower level, with his game insofar as despite being a playmaker, he’s become a shooter as needed. I really felt like “casually” scored almost 30 goals this year (29 total, playoffs included) with Stankoven likely leaving a few for him on the table. Whatever the case, Bourque is similarly adaptable, so while he is absolutely a different player from Johnston, he is at least similarly dynamic. (Not saying Bourque will bust out with a 50-point rookie year, going toe to toe for the Calder lead just like the two were in friendly competition in the AHL, but if Benn doesn’t hit his regression wall, the potential is there for something well above replacement level production.)

A digression: forward chemistry in the playoffs

Dallas’ forwards weren’t productive in the playoffs, but I think the hockey gods owe them a little next year. Not a single forward in the playoffs rated as bad either offensively and defensively. They all had something positive to offer on at least one side of the puck, and sometimes both.

Data and visual courtesy of JFresh Hockey.

Bourque’s presence doesn’t alter this picture, but it’s interesting to note that all of Dallas’ worst outliers (Radek Faksa and Ty Dellandrea) are gone.

The real question is whether or not Dallas can rediscover something dominant. While everyone played a role, they were all nestled within that group of solid instead of stellar. A newlook top line, or shifting chemistries could change that.

Summary

DeBoer will tinker with the lines, as all coaches do, but for the most part, his roster looks and feels ready-made. Should he decide to go with the above lines, he’ll have everything he had last season. I take it back. He’ll have a top line that is actually dominant, and his depth will be in a similar spot. I do wonder about the longevity of the veterans, though. Tyler Seguin and Mason Marchment in particular could be hit or miss. There’s just nothing about their respective games to offset a typical streak of cold shooting, like talent or possession, should it happen.

I think that’s the only scenario where the above depth chart gets shuffled, and where it could struggle. They’re a rugged crew that I suspect feasted on easier matchups in the regular season, which is why they went dead silent in the playoffs. In an effort to get them going, DeBoer might start placing them next to better players. To clarify — this is purely a hunch. But all in all, the forwards will be elite. I’d argue this is a better forward team than the one that played last year. Anyone arguing otherwise doesn’t believe in the existence of point vampires.

On the defense

For all the skeptics of my “Dallas’ blueline will be fine despite appearances” — and you are clearly the sane one between us if you are, so no judgment — perhaps no better illustration of my point is in this playoff chart.

Data and visual courtesy of JFresh Hockey.

The fact that even Dallas’ worst defenders were able to leverage one strength in the absence of another but never neither despite the blistering competition in front of them, IMO, tells you everything you need to know about what Dallas’ team defense is capable of, and how it’s able to elevate it’s more rugged aspects.

Whatever you think of Matt Dumba or Ilya Lyubushkin, I can’t imagine them dragging the defense down with them if players like Ryan Suter and Alex Petrovic couldn’t. Because of that, it’ll be difficult to gauge exactly where the blueline can be turned into an active strength. That’ll be what 2.0 (in September) is all about.

For now, there’s not much to say. It certainly looks bad on paper. But so did a lot of Dallas’ bluelines in years past when it felt like the Miro Heiskanen show. But that’s the thing: Heiskanen is so defensively good, it seems to have a knock-on effect. Where players like Cale Makar and Quinn Hughes can hit higher peaks while experiencing lower valleys, Heiskanen is an elevated mesa (somebody in the comments used this analogy, and it remains the best and most colorful way to distinguish Heiskanen’s game compared to his peers), and that seems to be the defining trait of this Stars team.

How this team will compare to last year’s roster is impossible to say, but I do think they’re gonna be more consistent. As in, they’ll probably lose games they deserve to win, unlike last year, where it seemed like they won a lot of games they deserved to lose. They’ll probably finish lower in the standings, making them look like more a darkhorse team, but I think there’s real potential to exceed in areas they otherwise lacked last season; like being able to generate more rush chances, and breaking out of the zone better.

Whatever you think they look like, the guts of the team who made back to back WC Finals are still there. And most of their most important players will be a step better.