Cruise control. That’s the expression that comes to mind when reflecting on the Stars’ early run. A 7-2 record sounds like Dallas is firing on all cylinders. It sounds like everyone is on the same page. But even the most optimistic fan would argue otherwise. This Victory Green squad has looked a little disjointed, and not just because of an anemic power play. That’s a better sign of good fortune than you would think.
This might seem like a cheesy argument, leveraging a similar logic to the “so bad it’s good” movie phenomenon. But we know that Dallas is a good team because back-to-back Western Conference Final appearances is what good teams achieve. However, the Stars’ early sample of games hasn’t been anything to write home about. They’re only outshooting the opposition 194-193, and their expected goal differential is 18-19, or under 50 percent share of shot quality. So why is “the bad” actually good?
It starts with everyone else. Chaos has been the order of the day around the Western Conference. Look at teams we expected to be good. Edmonton and Colorado are paddling like mad just to get out from under the ship, and they have the negative goal differentials to prove it. Meanwhile, teams we expected to be middling are posting obscene numbers. Minnesota has trailed for only 39 minutes, which leads the league, even ahead of the Stars (who have trailed for 49), while Winnipeg has yet to lose a game. Bad teams like Calgary, L.A., and St. Louis look good, buoyed by some unsustainable numbers, but also some good underlying metrics. Conversely, the Stars have stayed comfortably afloat, bobbing along without much strain.
Jake Oettinger is a big reason for that. After being given an eight-year, $66 million contract extension on October 17, he has been a brick wall, posting a .938 save percentage saving a full goal above expected per 60, ranking top three in the league, better than the undefeated Connor Hellebuyck and New York’s Igor Shesterkin. Logan Stankoven, meanwhile, is running neck and neck with the Goonies version of Nikita Kucherov, Philadelphia’s Matvei Michkov. Both have nine points through nine games, a pace from a rookie forward the NHL hasn’t seen Mat Barzal won the Calder in 2018 with 85 points.
We can add plenty of names to this list. Matt Duchene is leading the team in points, which I suspect nobody had on their bingo card. However, if the team has struggled to produce anything resembling a 60-minute effort, it’s because there are also plenty of names we can’t add to this list. The defense has been a black hole in the box score, with Miro Heiskanen’s paltry three points leading the way. Wyatt Johnston and Jamie Benn seem to be sputtering along now that Stankoven has played most of his minutes on the top line and his spot has been backfilled by Evgenii Dadonov. If we’re looking at sustainable numbers, like possession and shot quality differential, the end result is a team stuck in the middle.
But how many teams can perfunctorily flow toward success rather than dramatically ebb past their opponents? Consider the Carolina Hurricanes. They’re a plus-70 in shots at even strength, but all it’s bought them is a 5-2 record in the Metropolitan. The Vegas Golden Knights are shooting almost 14 percent at even strength. That’s absurd. For perspective, the average shooting percentage for a team at even strength since 2007 is 8 percent. However, Vegas’ 6-2-1 record wouldn’t even be top three in the Central.
Hockey always has been and always will be a difficult sport to analyze. Last year, the Stars’ 2.96 goals per game at even strength was the 30th-highest mark in the analytics era out of 520 rosters. And yet none of that translated in the playoffs. Plenty of teams would kill for the regular season the Boston Bruins had in 2022-23, when they set the record for most wins. No team would kill for what followed in the playoffs. Only 28 percent of the teams that have lost fewer than 24 regular-season games have won the Cup. In hockey, it’s almost like you need to be good before the postseason commences, but not too good.
That’s what makes the NHL so difficult to analyze. Every team essentially has two values: an intrinsic value (who they are in the long run) and an expressed value (what they show from game to game). The Stars have historically been a good team. The fact they’re not really showing that, but still winning, might be the best sign of all.
None of this means we need to celebrate tepid performances. Dallas absolutely deserved to lose that dreadful game to the Islanders, getting outshot 45-23 and doubled up on rush chances to a team known for being boring and slow. Something similar could be said about the Edmonton game, in which the penalty kill saved the day (a nice bit of reverse role play from this year’s playoffs, granted). But hockey is too fast and too random for elite teams to keep their foot on the gas pedal at all times.
That’s not to say the Stars aren’t being rewarded for their own unsustainable trends. Their save percentage of .943 will come back down to earth. Oettinger has looked great, but consider the opposition. In fact, Dallas’ strength of schedule ranks last in the league. Nobody has had it easier than the Stars.
But what are the chances that when Oettinger hits a rut, someone like Johnston won’t be in the middle of finding the groove we know he has? If the penalty kill gets leaky, what are the chances that’s when the power play, which ranks third in higher danger shot attempts in the two full seasons under assistant coach Steve Spott, kicks in?
Through only nine games, there’s not a lot to analyze. But we know there are many ways to win. Why is it a bad sign the Stars can win playing in neutral? If anything, it says a lot about what their top gear might look like once they hit it.
Author
