The Hockey PDOcast - Mikko Rantanen Going Nuclear on Saturday Night, and How the Stars Beat the Avalanche in Game 7

Episode Date: May 4, 2025

Dimitri Filipovic is joined by David Castillo and Robert Tiffin to react to Saturday night's wild Game 7 in Dallas, Mikko Rantanen going nuclear in the coolest possible way, how the Stars were able to find a way to improbably beat the Avalanche in Round 1, and what's next for them looking ahead to Round 2. If you'd like to gain access to the two extra shows we're doing each week this season, you can subscribe to our Patreon page here: www.patreon.com/thehockeypdocast/membership If you'd like to participate in the conversation and join the community we're building over on Discord, you can do so by signing up for the Hockey PDOcast's server here: https://discord.gg/a2QGRpJc84 The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

since 2015. It's the Hockey PDOCast with your host, Dmitri Filippovin. Welcome to the Hockey PTOCast. My name is Dimitri Filippovich. And joining me is my good buddy, David Kestio. David, what's going on, man? Ola. Nothing much.

Just waiting for you to introduce Robert next. We had to call in all the big guns, all hands on deck after Saturday nights. Game 7 masterpiece in Dallas. And so that's right, where we got Robert Diffin on making his PDO cast debut as well, a person I've wanted to have on for a while now. I think it's coverage of this Stars Ave series has been exemplary and no better time to do so than now, Robert, what's going on, man?

It's going good, Demetri. Good to be here. I think that was in a weird way the worst time to be here because words are kind of failing everyone to describe what we just saw, but I guess I'll do my best. We're certainly going to try to decipher everything we saw in case you are living under a rock and somehow missed it. the stars were down to nothing with just over 12 minutes left they had 13 shots on goal i believe for the game up until that point no mero heskinin no jason roberts in available all series and miko randon and just goes absolutely nuke with one of the most alpha playoff performances i

can never recall that you're ever certainly going to see i think the scene and robert you you brought this up in your in your post on your substack about it i think in particular the scene on empty netter with him kind of skating it in to the empty net, the hat flying in the air as he's completing the hat trick, not even waiting for it to officially happen. The crowd, just an absolute pandemonium. That's peak sports, right? Like, I'm just sitting on my couch at home. I've got goosebumps. I'm ready to run through a wall. I was like, the three of us have to get together and talk about this. It's why we watch and love sports. I think even if you're an Aves fan who just had your heart ripped out and stomped on, essentially, at least.

it makes you feel something, right? And I think that's incredibly special. And that's what's so cool about sports. And this kind of transcended it even. It's, I know it's kind of a cliche to be like, absolute cinema, but I don't know any other way to describe what we saw than absolutely that. It was that exactly. Like that swell of the crowd once the puck actually got out,

once Sagan kind of got it out, forced it out to the neutral zone off the wall. And as soon as Rattan in collects it, and he kind of curls in and he's going in alone from the blue line. It's just that moment where everyone in the building and everyone on TV, right, everyone watching knows everything about what that moment means and they're celebrating it before it even happens because you can't wait, right? It's like the celebration before the parade actually arrives because you know it's coming. It's that level of, yeah, cinema's probably the best word for it because it feels like it's fake.

I saw Brandon Smith as I was walking into the locker room yesterday and I just kind of shook my head and he walked up. He's like, couldn't scripting any better than that, huh? Like, yeah, that's exactly right. You couldn't script it. David, what's interesting to me is, I'll let you jump in a second. I wanted to ask you this, though, because, and you can vouch for this. We were exchanging DMs, I believe, after game three, and that was Ranton's first point

of the series, right? That play he made in the defensive zone in the overtime to essentially outwork both McKinnon and Drew Ann get the puck over to Marchman, and they wind up scoring off that rush opportunity. Even at that point, I really thought that, you know, the way you perceived Rantanin's performance in this season, series, even prior to all of the points flooding in in game five was a great litmus test, essentially, for whether you're a puck noor or not, because at the end of the day,

you're going to be judged in these types of scenarios, especially as a soon-to-be-12 million dollar player, about whether you put the puck into the net or not, whether you produce points. And I totally get that. But hockey is such a nuanced, complicated game with so much going on. And under the hood, if you actually just watched it, you would notice, especially from game two on, I thought game one was a bit of a struggle while they were still, rolling, Ranton in with Wad Johnson and Jamie Ben. But once they switched their lines in the second period of game two,

Ranton was doing so much good stuff in terms of protecting the puck, trying to create plays that weren't resulting in goals, but were still the right plays from below the goal line. And even if they weren't resulting in goals, at least they were accomplishing the job of keeping the abs kind of down low in their own and taking away their legs with these long shifts and preventing the rush opportunities that they were burning them with. whenever they got them.

And so we all kind of came full circle with it. Now I think everyone can appreciate the series Ranting and had on what he did. But even before this explosion of points over the past three games, I thought that he was already proving his worth to the stars in terms of acquiring him and why they did so and what he could provide to them. And so it was nice to see that he was rewarded for it. But I thought that was just the cherry on top because even before that, I thought he was playing phenomenal hockey.

Yeah, I don't know that there's anything to kind of say. here that isn't just filled with either expletives or something kind of lifted from the plays the right way soundboard right we're talking about a hat trick in response to a two-gold deficit in the final period of the final game of a playoff series and i think that performance kind of speaks for itself as does colorado's defending on that first goal for being honest but it's just really nice and maybe i'm kind of jumping around because i think there's a lot of kind of systems talk you kind of kind of threw in there that that i think is really interesting to highlight you know eventually but But it's just nice to have the trade be validated because we want to see teams make big moves.

And unfortunately, for hockey GM culture, they can only make them if there's already proof of concept. And here it is, right? It's a nice spotlight on the concept of hockey being that kind of strong link sport. Kind of going back to Alex Nove's seminal piece at hockey graphs, right? For lay fans, the research is obvious. The team with the best players tends to win. We get that. But what's less obvious is the equally critical second part about his kind of thesis, which is how, you know, teams with the best players more likely to win, even at the cost of creating weaknesses elsewhere in the lineup.

And I think game seven was just this dramatic example of this. And I think one of the reasons why I was okay with the trade because it meant Dallas was willing to lean into their strongest links, the strong link being their offense, rather than try to fix their weaknesses. Granted, it's one round. So nobody's planning any parades here. And for sure, Dallas's weaknesses were on full display. But, I mean, what a statement to win a series without Heiskin and Robertson and how good they really are when they're healthy? Yeah, that I'm glad that you brought up, Dimitri,

earlier in the series too with Rantan, because that game won, even though I think the Aves ended up winning at like 5-1, that really was a good game for Dallas, even without Rantan really being fully online, or on the right line, you might say. And that one could have gone the other way. Obviously, had the Lekinin crazy bounce. McKinnon had a power play goal, deflected off Lubushkin, right?

The result kind of belied the actual process in that game one. Like games one and two, both were really close. Dallas won, the second one in overtime. And then they kind of stole game three. The abs kind of took over in games three through five, right? And that's where they really, all the big numbers and lopsided things in the series, games, even three through six, I guess you'd say. Really, that's where Colorado was fully online.

And that's why Game 7 felt, as much as it was, a completely improbable kind of flipping the script, the last minute come back against the better team, that it really was a series where that's all you needed was someone to step up at the right time to find the right line combination, to find the right matchup. I guess we can talk about coaching in line matchups later. But it was, this series definitely has a story that started in game one and game two. And it felt like that story ended a little bit bookending the way it began.

Yeah. And that's the thesis when you go out and make a trade of this magnitude to bring in a guy like Ranton and right. Obviously, this is to the next level. in terms of four points in the second period of game six, the heroics there falls short, but then the four points and the hat trick in the third period of game seven in the particular manner in which he did it, right? The first goal kind of holding on to the puck, and I know sometimes people are frustrated when a guy like Ranton in who is such high skill level is overly

patient at times and maybe works himself out of scoring situations, but in this one you see rather than just kind of panicking and getting a rush shot off, he works his way into the middle, goes barred down. The burst on the solo effort on the second one benefits off of a bounce off of Gerard's skate, which is the latest entry into a series of them essentially in these games. And then everything else that followed winds up with five goals and six assists in the final three games of this series. It was just an all-time individual performance. I don't think I'm ever going to forget it, especially within the context of doing it to your former team after having been traded twice. And Robert, I think, you know, on the broadcast, Ray Ferraro, who was sitting between

the benches for this game, was noting that I think it was after the empty netter, but he essentially skated by the absentee. And I'm going to paraphrase, but ask them if they like apples, essentially, which was a nice sort of end to this. The thesis here, though, right, is it works out nicely, but even if it hadn't, this is precisely why you go out and get a Miko-Ranton when you have the chance to do so and when the chance that presents itself, I feel like you always have to do it in this sport. And that's kind of counter, I think, to the way teams have generally operated in the past,

but just consolidating assets in the hopes of landing one of these few guys that actually can meaningfully alter the trajectory or franchise, the way he just did here, is something you always have to explore and try to do. David mentions the proof of concept. I think we've already seen at Vegas and Florida. I've kind of operated this way over the past three to five years. and I've obviously each had a ton of success in doing so

and have won Stanley Cups and had that to show for it. But this is kind of, you know, if you're Jim Nell, you're probably sitting and you're watching this and feeling pretty good about yourself in terms of pulling the trigger on this type of move. Yeah, and it's a move against type too that I know a lot of people have written about, but it shouldn't be discounted for that. Because not only does Jim Nell have to decide to make this move,

which is a gamble, right? Moving on from a player like Stancoven, he knows very well that there's a big change. chance that the older player, you know, only a year or two away from 30, that if his decline comes a little too soon or some injuries hit, and then Stankhoven becomes, you know, what they all kind of thought he's going to become and still do, that this could look bad a lot earlier than you'd like. Like, it's definitely a bet, but it's the sort of bet, like you said, that teams like Florida and Vegas have been making and have been showing that nowadays, you kind of have to make.

You kind of have to use your cap space to occasionally take a really big swing, and you have to do it with the players who have the highest leverage. And there's, well, as we saw, there aren't very many players who have the capability of delivering a higher leverage performance than Mika Rantman. The other part of that context, too, like Logan Stankovin is a player, their owner, Tom Gowardy loves Logan Stankovin. He knew his family, like, growing up, when Gilardi was like helping coach his son's hockey team, they would coach against Stankovin's team.

And then he drafted him, you know, for Camloops, which Glarty also owns in the W. and then they draft, of course, in Dallas and bring him up, and he has that great start to his rookie year last year, plays in the playoffs. So to move on from a player like that that your owner loves, that's a bet for the GM also, right? Because if that goes south, even though, you know, of course, Sclarity probably signs off in a trade that big,

that's still a big one that could hurt a lot. But somehow I think it hurts a lot less now after that performance last night. David, I want to ask you, I think one of you were mentioning the matchups, I kind of noted in passing there that Pete DeBurz started this series with the vision of playing Ranton in with Wyatt Johnson and Ben saw four periods essentially of it, using them in more of a defensive role against the Afts top players and was like, all right, I need to do something different here. We need to create more offense from these guys. And so he puts Randon in with hints. And I want to lump Rupa Hinson here as well, right? Because last postseason, he was clearly a shell of himself physically, was missing games, which wasn't right, even when he was in.

in there. And then you watch the way this series plays out and what a kind of chaotic force, his individual speed can be, especially in tandem with Rantanin, where in that game six, they were collaborating so well with Rantin and kind of almost as like a midfielder in soccer, kind of holding the line and then dishing it off to him so that he can activate that runway and fly the way Rupert Hince does. And we saw, obviously, shorthanded, he draws the penalty on Kilmaccar in this game that helps swing it. He winds up himself with four goals and seven points, draws four penalties throughout these seven games. And I feel like I want to give hints here a little bit of love too because it wasn't certainly just a pure individual effort. I thought the tandem

of those two and the decision to make that lineup switch essentially and adjust his lines was also a big win here for Pete DeBoer and a big reason why they were able to unlock these two guys. No, no, that's a great point. And I think there's kind of like a chicken or egg sort of situation with these kind of line combos and what, you know, DeBoer really did to kind of adjust to, you know, trying to slow down Colorado's breakouts. This is something I wrote about or did some film room analysis on how the stars kind of pivoted to more of like a cycle forecheck attack,

which I think was kind of a function of moving ranting in around with Hinson Grandlin and but also maybe kind of like, you know, a cause of. You know, this is a team that for most of the season, at least until the behemoth, that is the Utah Hockey Club, of course caught up to them, was the top rush team in the league in terms of rush chances. And we're all familiar with the kind of unique method of cherry plan and having guys tactically blow the zone when the defenders gain possession. But in an effort to slow down Colorado's breakouts, stars really went all in on the forecheck, like attacking the walls, bouncing point shops off the boards, focusing on dumping retrievals to really kind of burn time in the avalanche's zone. And Corey's tracking data confirmed that.

Like through the first two games, Dallas had 44 chances off the cycle to lead both. both teams versus like a meager 19 chances they had off the rush. Not to say they dish the rush attack completely, just that it really felt like a concerted effort. So it's not the only thing, you know, special teams is obviously a big part of this in terms of Pete DeBore's job being the other element. But I think it's still a really unique example of team adaptation and adjustment. And I don't think enough can be said about how this series was kind of a great case study in systems and tactics with, as you mentioned, you know, kind of moving around this sort of Tetris of players to really maximize that impact.

Yeah, that abandoning the, not abandoning completely, but moving away from kind of the rush attack thing on Rinton's first goal last night, I wondered if there was maybe a grain of assumption in some of the Colorado skaters' minds there, because Rantan has the puck coming in about the right point, and then he cuts hard into the slot and says, no, no, I'm not going to go wide and kind of set up the cycle or look for it for a pass down low. We're going right now. And he cuts over and, you know, steal, kind of helps them and create some space there too.

But it was one of those where you always wonder, you know, players are always having to make reads and they make those reads based off both what they see and what they have seen. And that was a moment where I really did wonder if maybe the persistent kind of cycling and taking the puck a little wider at times that they'd done just to try to set up in the offensive zone, if that gave him that extra little bit of space to cut there and make the play right off the rush and rip that shot. Robert, I want to talk about the other side of that ledger because I mentioned

how they started this series with Ranton and playing with Wyatt Johnston. I thought that YGO had, you know, in the aggregate, a tough goal of it 5-1-5 in this series. He finishes with one goal, two assists in about 100 minutes, outscored 6-3 of 515, outshot, 5131. It's very important, certainly, to apply the context of the assignment and the task at hand, right, where he's playing with Ben and Adonov. They're tasked with a head-to-head matchup against McKinnon. I believe he plays 40 of those minutes against him, and they hold the abs to just one, 5-on-5-on-five goal in that time.

As part of it, it's synced up with minutes largely with C.C. and Lendell, as opposed to playing with Harley. You look, he's got 46 defensive zone draws to his name, as opposed to just 24 offensive ones. It was clear that, you know, to enable and allow rant and enhance the cook offensively, he was essentially going to have to bite the bullet here in this matchup. I thought he was tremendous in the game seven. He leads all-stars forwards with 21-21 played the puck dominance. In the first, you know, it winds up culminating in Jamie Ben's double minor.

But if you go back and watch what led up to that, it's like a puck possession clinic behind the net that he brings out front, puts on a couple moves, weaves, gets a nice backhand chance. In the second period, he sets up on the year of Genni Dadaunov, Rush goal, where he shows patience and poise with the puck kind of dishes it past Devon Taves. And I thought Devon Taves in this game put on a defensive clinic of erasing everything. The stars were trying to throw at him and he got it around him. And then he scores the power play goal at the end to put them up three, two. And Ray Ferrar on the broadcast did a great job of noting just, you know, it looks like an easy shot, but just I think the patience and the poise to gather himself and not rush it from that angle, when often we see players kind of do exactly that and wind up either missing the net or shooting it into the goalies pads.

He really picks his spot and buries it. And then you put on top of the fact that I thought he did an exemplary job of corraling McKinnon in this game. really the goal early in the third McKinnon scores, where he comes fresh off the bench as the extra attacker on a delayed penalty and kind of works his way around. Johnston before beating on Junker was the only time at 5-1-5 at least that I can remember in that Game 7 where McKinnon was able to shake loose and get an opportunity like that.

And so you put that all together, and I thought it was a phenomenal game 7 performance, obviously on the biggest stage when they needed them most in putting together everything that he had done throughout the entirety of the series. Yeah, it really was, I mean, he's 21 years old. It's just ridiculous every time you talk about why. I was talking to some people at the under 18s this year. And because someone else had asked, someone else had asked,

who's the next Wyatt Johnson? They said, well, I don't know if there's going to be another Wyatt Johnson because players like that aren't usually picked, you know, outside of the top five in a draft. It was kind of unique circumstance with COVID and everything that kind of allowed him to fall the way he did. and he and Rope hints also, the stars use them as penalty killers for a lot of the same reasons that Johnston is so good at and matching up against a player like McKinnon. It's not just his ability to create space with some incredible stick handling, awareness in the way he uses his skating and his edgework to just constantly kind of keep guys guessing

and force them to give him a little bit more of a gap. But it's also the way that he can control shot lanes and not lose balance. and anticipate, he's not a player that you can easily curl off of and create something. Like you mentioned the six on five goal by McKinnon, and that's a perfect example of when you really do have coverage problems, it affects even the best defensive players going to have trouble because you get caught in between. We kind of saw it with Harley on the short-handed goal, too. You can be really great at this stuff, but when you get forced to make hard choices,

that's when the best offensive players can really make plays. That goal he scored on the power play was also really vindicating for him. well, Vinigating maybe isn't the right word, but it reminded me very much of Yoel Kivirontas' second goal in 2020 when he had his hat-trick against Colorado from almost the same angle, the same spot in the ice, almost below the goal line. It's just that sort of shot that, you know, in the moment you see,

oh, the goalie scrambling, diving, kind of out of position. Of course, you expect a player to score that. But the more you look at it, the more you appreciate everything that goes into that. And I think his defensive games the same way. The more you looked at how hard after game one, DeBoar really did in every other home game, hard-matched Johnston and Cece and Lindell, who are their own sort of thing we could talk about that whole matchup.

But it was incredible. Johnston really, you know, he's 21 years old. That's what everyone says. Anytime you start saying something about him, like, he's just 21 years old. It's ridiculous. David, I love having you on during these. I love having you on regardless. I feel like I save you in my back pocket for the playoffs, though, because I love the way

you sort of see the game and think about the chess match element of it, which I think is most prevalent in these long postseason series. And in particular, in this one where you really saw it come to the forefront, was on the special teams, right? Where the details are so important, how the two teams try to take away each other's strengths and what adjustments they can put in place on the fly become incredibly important. And the stars clearly had a sizable edge on special teams over the abs in this series. You look on the power play, the avs score just three goals in 38 minutes.

they had a double minor early on in this one and came up empty. I think partly why they struggled was just, Kail McCar was inexplicably erratic in this series as a shooter. He had 71 attempts, scored just the one empty net goal. He was missing the net badly time and time again from prime scoring areas. I clearly wasn't at 100% I'm not sure what was going on there. On the other end, the Dallas Powerplay, which did get burned twice for short-handed goals by Logan O'Connor setting them up,

who seemingly was the only person in the series that could make Thomas Harley look mortal at times that stars powerplay still on their end manufactured seven power play goals of their own in 35 minutes and i want to focus on the last one in particular the wide johnson one we talked about earlier where i thought the the irony of it was was incredibly tasty here right because i'd been sort of talking about how throughout this series the stars have been pressuring mckenin after he scored that power play goal early in the second game two i believe and not really letting him step into that shot as much. And it sort of discombobulated the ABS power play a little bit where they weren't really willing or able to work the puck down low and punish the stars for being a bit aggressive

in that sense. And in this case, what you saw the stars do was everything that had been lacking from the ABS portfolio with a man advantage where Dushan does a brilliant job of holding his ground and forcing Blackwood to kind of be flattened along his goal line. He quickly steps out, gets the puck and does a little fake and then sends a cross-ice for the Wyatt Johnston tally. And that sort of utilization of the down-low threat and that cross-ice passing was something that was visibly lacking from the Aves power play in this series. And so for the stars to execute exactly that way and finish it off, I thought was very notable when you compare that edge there in the special teams and the way they executed as opposed to the Aves not doing so. Yeah, I'm really glad that you bring up, also kind of give Dushan credit since he was kind of a, it was really turned into a pariah kind of when the series started to look like it was going to be Colorado's. And I think it's something actually that, you know, your good buddy Thomas Drance talked about when kind of looking over the Winnipeg St. Louis series and how we're so used to the kind of language of hockey being so framed by defense that it's more about identifying like when.

things break down as opposed to, you know, when players do things correctly with vision and creativity and skill. And that was a great example, not just of Dushain's instincts kind of carrying the play, but also kind of the power play doing things that Colorado's power play just absolutely refuse to do. Now, granted, I do think a lot of credit goes to Dallas. That like they, I mean, for them, right, it kind of went back to my personal theory that, you know, this series really to me, kind of won by coaching, and Dallas just constantly overwhelmed Colorado's point. And I think that explains why McCar wasn't as, you know, visible as he normally was. So a lot of credit goes to the PK there, kind of luring them into a false sense of security.

They kept giving Colorado the entry, making sure that entry didn't create an odd man situation down low. And so all series Dallas just murdered Colorado at midrange. I thought Steele Blackwell and Bushkin in particular deserve credit because there were some of the key aggressors and pressuring the flanks. And you look at the heat maps for Colorado's powerplay in the series, and they were completely locked out of the left side of the ice, including the space where McCar tends to cook. And in response, Colorado just kept stepping on rakes.

They could tend to pass along the perimeter for some random McKinnon magic. And just what a difference right between power plays between these two teams. Yeah, it was shocking how often Dallas allowed themselves to be outnumbered down low when they were killing the penalty. And Colorado just consistently refuse to try to kind of force things to the space in front of the net. So they'd either reset and send it back up high to go around to the other side or whatever, or they try to curl around and get a shot from a low angle. And, you know, Ottinger was really good on most of those.

And it's one of the reasons McKinnon's the only one who scored any powerplay goals from them because they were really forcing those things. And, you know, obviously over the course of a season, I'd expect a power play like Colorado is to figure that out with players like NACN and Lackin and even McCart, right? to sort that out. But in the course of a seven game series, you need your coaches to figure out how to adjust that or communicate those adjustments. And it just seemed like they couldn't do it. And they just kept trying the same things. And well, yeah, step it on Rakes is a good way to put it.

All right, guys, let's take our break here. And then we come back. We'll finish up. I got so much more to dive into with the two of you on this series. You're listening to the Hockey Ptogast streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network. All right. We're back here on the Hockeypedio cast, joined by Robert Tiffin and David Castillo. Guys, maybe it shouldn't have been a surprise to us that a team with Pete DeBurro who is now 9-0 in Game 7s and Mr. Game 7 himself, Cody Cici,

and probably won a game of this fashion. I still think given the circumstances, it was a shocker. And Robert, you were kind of noting Nathan McKinnon after the game is posting comments and kind of how an absolute shock he was himself. So I think that was reflective of that.

The stars led for, by my count, 10-19 per game over the course of the series. Now, to put that into context, that was 15 out of the 16 playoff teams that competed in round one. Only Montreal, who lost their series in five, led less frequently than the stars did. In three of their four wins, they led for a combined 458 of game time. Now, I note that as being an interesting anecdote. It's the NHL postseason.

So essentially, I think you have to throw out all logic out the window, especially in a series like this one that, as we noted earlier, featured so many wild bounces and goals that, you know, factored prominently into things, a bicycle kick off of defenders' legs, shooting it off their own teammates, the Sam Gerard own goal in Game 7. Even beyond that in this one, I thought the back wall in this game was incredibly lively. Like, it was just bouncing out front. It didn't wind up costing either team.

But it was absolute mayhem. I also thought it was a very, in typical fashion, what you expect from a Game 7, pretty low event early on, very tight checking. It looked like players were sort of, I think because of the magnitude of the moment, overgripping their sticks a little bit, fanning on stuff the otherwise wouldn't, broken sticks that obviously factored in largely on the Kilmacarr penalty after the fact. But yeah, it was a wild game. It was what you'd expect from a game seven.

And yet, you know, I have to fess up. I don't know how you guys felt about this heading in. Maybe you were more confident than I was. But I certainly, I picked the abs to win the series in five. I couldn't shake what I'd seen in the final 25, 30 games with how bad the stars had looked defensively and how good the abs had looked offensively, especially post-deadline. And so I thought that this series would be very, would look essentially like game four did for the most part.

And we saw the abs have those outbursts mixed in, certainly in games four in game six, but for the most part, I think the stars deserve a ton of credit for the adjustments they made the way they were able to slow them down and kind of turn these games, especially this game seven, into one they were a much more comfortable playing given the lack of defensive options and everything plaguing them injury-wise. And so I don't know if you have any notes on that kind of how they were able to do so or why this series played out the way they did, but I thought that was a very, very notable development. S. Lendell in particular is a sort of player and he does this on the penalty kill.

And like you said, going into this series, if you had said S. Lindell and Cody C.C. are going to be by choice for Dallas, the primary defensive pairing against Nathan McKinnon's line. And they're going to get pretty much caved in in shot attempts and expected goals. I think they were like 30 percent, like 30 or 31 percent in expected goals at five on five. Esselandell was over like 130 minutes. And yet their goal differential at five on five is just going to be minus one. four goals, four, five against. And then you go and look at Keal McCar, he had over 60% expected goals that all of these other numbers, you know, well above and also where you'd expect him to be his goal differential, four goals four, five against. The exact same five on five goal differential, despite shot attempts being just absurdly inverted for those two.

It really, the way Esselendell does on the penalty kill is he is not usually one who's going to telescope out and pressure too hard, unless it's a really specific spot. where it's the right thing to do. He'll sit back and kind of conserve energy and make smaller bursts and stick checks in the kind of highest danger areas. And he does it with such precision. The penalty kill is really where I think it's at its best because you don't need

transition play there, right? You don't need a grade up. You don't need to figure out the breakouts or skate it out of trouble. You just need to prevent the highest danger opportunities. And Esselendell is really as good at that as I think any defenseman in the league probably. How well you think that plays out over the course of a season is probably up for debate, but certainly in a short series, and especially at special teams. And even, frankly, at five-on-five, when Colorado could get Interior,

Lendell and Sisi somehow kept managing to kind of sabotage the best chances at the last minute. And it's ridiculous. It's storybook. It's, you know, it's horrible luck, I guess, depending on what perspective you're looking at it from. But those numbers to kind of defy the odds to that. to that level, you really can only do it when you're battening down the hatches and guarding against the very most dangerous opportunities and somehow they managed to do it. Yeah, just to kind of add, I feel like Stars fans are going to maybe hate this take,

but it's definitely going to be an outcome bias to this series. Dallas won. So their blue line must have been good or if not good, they must have done something right in order for Dallas to win. And I don't buy that. The difference was Golton and playing in a set. But like, Adinger had a 949 save percentage behind the Harley pair and a 952 save percentage behind the Lindel pair.

And that, to me, was the difference. Now, do I think they perform better than expected? Also, no. I think they are who we thought they were. Without Heiskenon, it's a blue line that's going to struggle hard because they just don't have top four players in their top four. Does that mean I have nothing good to say about their performance? Yeah, kind of.

That's exactly what it means. Like we're out praising Stuart Skinner or Calvin Picard for a good goal. And just because Edmonton beat L.A. And, you know, this is exactly how bad players keep getting signed, right? But I do think DeBore's general approach and the way they were able to pressure Colorado on breakouts really kind of mitigated and minimized how often the pair like Lendell and Cici had to be out there defending the types of chances that Colorado is known for. And I think that in addition to Audinger was really kind of the difference. So I do think Dallas's blue line bent and broke, but it just didn't matter because Audinger was elite.

The Ford Depp was elite. Miko Ranton had the Infinity Stones and DeBore won the matchups at home and special teams. And also, you know, I will say if you want to talk about good things about Dallas's blue line, I do think broadly speaking, it was like you look at each pair. Each pair adds value in one spot, Harley on the top pair. Lindell on the second. and Bill and Bixel on the third pair. I'm not sure you can make the case for Colorado's blue line.

And not a lot of people have talked about that, where Bionte's and McCar, I didn't think Gerard and Manson, who have really declined over the years, were that great. And then you had Malinsky on an island because players like Lindgren and Eric Johnson, for some inexplicable reason, got more minutes.

So, I mean, I give Ben our credit for moving away from Johnson and going back to Malinski. that seemed like, but it's also one of those adjustments like people talk about with Chris Knoblock in Edmonton, right? Like, okay, you made the adjustment, but why didn't you start that way? You probably, you probably could have, you know, won one of those first, one more of those three games if you'd really been, you know, icing your optimal lineup. But that depth, yeah, I mean, you look at the numbers and really DeBoer managed to, whether you say shelter or deploy or whatever, the Dallas third defense pairing came out of the series looking really good. And that's

remarkable with a 20-year-old rookie and a, let's say, a journeyman defenseman who's played more playoff NHL games than regular season NHL games in the last two years. I think it helps that Pete DeBer did a really good job with the matchups here, right? He kept them for the most part out of the defensive zone. You look at their zone starts and they led the team in offensive zone opportunities, which on the one hand is like, all right, well, you probably don't want Alex Petrovich and Liam Bischel leading you there. But at the same time, if you're trying to minimize the defensive exposure, that's certainly one

way to do it and then play or absorb a guys more starting out in their own zone. But to your point, David, I thought Jake Odinger was phenomenal in this series. Ironically, his best performance was probably the game four. He winds up being pulled to the second intermission just to kind of preserve him heading into the final three games of this series. He winds up stopping 203 out of 223 shots for a 910, say, percentage. Spore Logic had the abs at 113 slot shots, 59 rush chances in seven games, a huge edge in offensive zone possession time. And I thought even within the game seven when it was two nothing and then two one,

he made a couple big stops there to keep the stars alive and give them a chance to come back and tie it and ultimately win it. And I really felt like he specifically individually needed a series like this, right? I thought that for the most part he had still been kind of riding that 64 save

game seven against the flames in 22 to keep the perception, I guess, of his reputation the way that was where you'd look at all the sort of like NHL.com polls of Lesnar guys and all of a sudden he'd be in the top five or six and it's like, all right, I don't know if that's necessarily the case based on the actual results themselves had still been considered this big time playoff performer despite the fact that the past two postseason's 23 he gets pulled a couple times as those as that postseason progresses last year, the last three

games against the Oilers was under an 875, say percentage I believe, at all three. and he was excellent in this series. I felt like he really needed it, and he came through for them, and that, you know, to David's point, probably was the difference here where you're playing this bend but don't break strategy. You're going to be very reliant on your goalie

to step up on some of these rush shots, and he did that for the most part. You know, he was really outdone by a couple of unfortunate balances, especially in game one, but for the most part, he made all the saves he needed to and then some, and that really was a difference here. Yeah, game five, I mean,

you look at it was two-two right and i think both goalies could could point to you know blackwood being really good early in this series and and on your too but some bounces went against him and also you know when it comes to having that absorbed pairing like you said one of the dangers of that is that eventually a bounce is going to go against you or maybe a couple and and as much as it can work in the context of a period or a game or even sometimes a series you know longer term eventually if you keep getting getting outshot and out chanced you know you're going to have the those bounces go against you eventually. But as this series went on, and when they got to game five,

and they opened up game five, White Johnston scores that pretty ugly or beautiful, depending on your perspective goal against Blackwood. From there, it was really no contest, I thought, in terms of goaltending. Audenger just got stronger and stronger from that point. Building off of Game 4, like you said, even though the outcome was obviously very different, it really seemed like he had the ability to quiet things down, to not be giving up too many rebounds. And Blackwood's rebound control really just stopped looking,

stopped looking even average, which it kind of was earlier in the series, but he was just blocking everything and it was enough. But later in the series, it just clearly started causing a little bit more chaos. And I give Ottenger a lot of credit for not. I mean, he's one of the only goalies that talks on game days before he's starting.

He's just as relaxed and joking around and messing around with players in the room and media and stuff. It just doesn't bother him. And, you know, that's a narrative that, that's great when he wins and then it doesn't work so well when he loses. But it's hard to, it's hard not to think about that part of his demeanor when you see him put up a performance like he did in the last few games of this series.

I also want to get back to just watching the spreadsheets here. So the games, because I think Audinger is a really interesting player statistically. Because before like the series, I would not have called Audinger a great goalie. I would say he gets that rep on like lazy broadcast because they see, oh, Dallas is his successful team. They're paying him a lot of money, and so he gets put into that elite bin. But I think the truth is that he's a goalie that won't lose you games. And you see that in his quality starts, for example, like in the playoffs.

And some people might consider that faint praise, but I don't see it that way at all. Like whenever you consider how chaotic and unstable the position can be, I mean, just look at Hellebuck in Winnipeg right now. Again, I know that's kind of a cheap talking point, but nonetheless, like somebody that can actively reduce the chaos is actually kind of awesome. And even looking at Oddinger's fancy, fancy stat alert, Delta Thinwick save percentage, which is the difference between his expected save percentage from his observed save percentage. He's actually slightly better in the playoffs, which is currently ninth among active goaltenders. So he's like the perfect Osgood. Wow, that was, that was damning with fame praise.

I think, I think, oh, my God, I didn't realize it was that bad. Listen, this series, I think was so interesting because of, Some of that sort of styles make the matchup stuff we've been hinting at with the way these two teams needed to operate to be at their best, especially offensively. And from the star's perspective, it really came down to the details of just requiring, I think, immense positional discipline and execution, especially down low, right, in terms of like holding your space and getting back and protecting certain areas. And Robert, you know, I referenced this at the time after game two, I believe, but following game one, which the stars were in it. Certainly it was a one goal game late. They had opportunities to tie it.

Jake Andre got beaten by a couple of unlucky goals off the bicycle kick and then the shot that went off Lubbushkin from McKinnon. But if you watch that game the way it was played, it was pretty clear that despite the results, the stars couldn't really get away with allowing the abs to just fly that much in transition the way they did. They were wildly overaggressive, low in the offensive zone, and they were getting burned by it.

And so they did make that. adjustment not only switching up the forward lines, but just positionally and tactically, the way they were approaching some of these scenarios, a couple of the games got away from them in games four and six as they progressed. But for the most part, I actually do think they deserve a lot of credit for the way they kind of micromanage this. And if you're going to do so, there's probably no better coach to have in the league than Peterborough, because that's an area he certainly excels that tactically. And so I do think that's kind of what we saw here. was an immense task for them without having Robertson and Hayskin and the personnel they had to work with

and they accomplished it. Partly getting the saves they did, but I do think all sides deserve credit for kind of the way they approach this and especially as the way the series progressed, the way they kind of that handle it from all fronts. Yeah, it would be so easy to, to, like, I don't want to say overreact because it's your job as a coach to coach. Like a coach is going to coach. And when you get beaten the way they did in game four in game six,

Pete DeBore is of course going to look at it and say, we can't just say, oh, we just didn't have our A game. It's okay. Let's take another kick at the can tomorrow. I can't remember expected goals in game four, but it was something like 75% for Colorado at 5.5%. It was just absurd. So you expected them at best to play a really, really tight, cagey game in game five.

and instead they end up counter attacking really, really well. They end up making the adjustments and they have the home matchups, right? And that all coalesces to start frustrating players, right, Game 5. McKinnon's, you know, Furious on the bench, Nachushkin's breaking his stick and it's lying in the middle of the ice is playing on. That level of kind of confidence to respond to a really bad loss and say, I'm not going to reshuffle the lines again. I'm not going to switch defense pairs or anything like that.

Tactically, we're just going to go back and look at things. And they were really insistent on this. And even some other people I talked to in the organization, they were really insistent on they had a recipe with a lineup they knew was not ideal to match up against this team and win. And they really felt like they probably should have had a 2-0 lead after the start of the series. And then that coin flip in game three, they felt like this could have been 3-0 really for either team,

but that Dallas had as much claim to potentially being in that spot as Colorado did. So in game five, when they came out and Johnson scored that early goal, and they just kept locking down the center of the ice, frustrating the avalanche, and then capitalizing on the avalanche, kind of doing a little bit in the middle of the offensive zone, what Dallas was doing below the goal line, in the offensive zone in game one,

the scoring chances just started flowing, and their rush attack, and they were finding space all over the place. And then in game six, that wasn't there because the avalanche made the adjustments to avoid that and pressure more concertedly, I think you can see when you go by and went back and rewatch that game a little bit, too.

But game seven was predictably, predictably tight. And if there was pressure that got to anyone at any point, I think game seven probably, like you said earlier on, there were nerves and people gripping sticks too tightly. So neither team was completely executing. And Colorado's skill was starting to take over. But that in-game adjustment in game five for me was a really, really big point of the series where they responded to a horrible loss.

And it was like it never happened. Everyone shook it off. And that, you have to give coaching a lot of credit for that, I think. Robert, I'm going to ask you about the, if you have any updates on the timeline for Miro and Jerov just being around the team and kind of get in a better sense of it, obviously in the postseason, a lot of smoke screens. Generally, teams are pretty coy about this stuff. But you look and I thought it's notable that I think part of this is just getting past the

avalanche in round one and sort of what a monster heavyweight tilt this was and that kind of painting the perception. But the stars all of a sudden on the betting market are up to Stanley Cup favorites at plus 380, the Panthers and the hurricanes are behind them. And that would signal to me that there's some sort of anticipation of return here and confidence that we're going to see some fully realized version of the stars. It seems like Robertson is probably certainly closer than Mero because there's so many extenuating circumstances.

And I think one of them is that if he's going to play, he's probably going to step into the massive role that he had previously and trying to alleviate some of the workload that Harley's had here. So it's a big kind of hurdle to cross for a player to get back in the lineup and immediately do so. But do you have any notes on kind of where we're at with that as we look ahead to round two a little bit? Yeah, it was interesting. Robertson actually came out for morning skate before game seven yesterday, which he hadn't done any of that. He had skated a little bit separately, I know, and with a couple like Nils Lundquist, who also maybe could return in round three or four, maybe. That's a long way off. He had shoulder surgery.

But Mero had knee surgery, right, after the Mark Stone hit. And we don't know exactly what surgery or surgeries he had. Obviously, the stars kind of have kept that all more quiet, but we know he had knee surgery. Whereas Robertson, he's already back skating. He didn't have surgery. So whatever the extent of the injury that certainly looked like a knee injury we saw in the last game of the season against Nashville, it makes sense to me that Robertson's recovery would not necessarily, would be able to be a little bit more accelerated than Haskinins just because he doesn't,

he didn't miss, you know, three months, right? He's not having to build back to where he needs to be. And he's also not going to be asked to play 27 minutes night when he comes out. Being a winger, especially winger like Robertson, whose game isn't built around eating up tons of ice anyway, it makes sense to me that what, you know, especially if it's just, let's say, for example, if it's, you know, a low-grade MCL strain or something like that,

you can put a hinge brace on that. And probably there's a lot you can still do as a forward that isn't going to be too much of liability for your team and probably isn't going to put you at risk for too much. a defenseman like Hayskinin, coming back from knee surgery, all the things you have to do, and whatever the extent of that surgery or surgeries were, it makes sense to me that even though he had been, he's been skating for longer than Robertson, that his return could be more prolonged. Pete DeVore did say after the game last night that, that, but he expects to see both

players in round two. So, so I'm sure that influenced the betting odds a little bit. and I also have heard some things that suggest that suggests that that is definitely the case and that Robertson actually also is in very good shape. Mirro's the thing they're keeping a little quieter, but Hastan's also been practicing a lot longer and being around the team. And of course, his skating is so kind of preternatural anyway that

you always kind of feel like him at even 75% is going to be as good as anyone else. So I, yeah, from what I've seen and heard, that lines up with what DeBoard said of them coming back at some point in round two. I don't think that's just I don't think that's just gamesmanship or anything. I really do expect to see to see both of them at some point in round two. And Robertson, weirdly to me, might even come back sooner, but that's just a gut feeling. So, David, if we do get Robertson back here in round two, do you think the natural fit is just putting him alongside Hints and Randinen and then maybe bumping Granland to play with Wyatt Johnson and giving him a bit more playmaking to unlock more offensively from.

from YGO 5 on 5, especially, you know, we, as we're recording, we don't know whether it's going to be a round two matchup against the Jets or the blues. But regardless of the opposition, it's probably not a team you're facing where you're going to be so, um, so just disciplined and focused on, all right, we got to get Y Johnson out against this other team's top line. We're not necessarily as concerned about it. So maybe you could even mind a bit more five on five offense from that combination. And so you put Granland there. What would you be doing if you were Pete DeBurr? and you do get Jason Robertson back here some point around too. So I've advocated for, excuse me, I've advocated for Granlin with Hince and Rantan for some time because, well, that's what amateur, you know, writers do

when they have too much time on their hands. But like, I think for me, the reason why I think Granlin and Hints and Rantin should stay is that Granlin Hints give Rantin a little bit of extra speed. So sure, it's not quite Rantan and level, but having two players like that that can kind of focus more on, you know, those zone entries, you know, leave and Ranton and kind of, you know, trail behind and make plays as he did with McKinnon is kind of pretty close to, not close to, but like, you know, a loose approximation of what Rantan had

available in Colorado. And so, so I think that line should absolutely stay. If anything, I think Robertson, you know, maybe kind of deserves some time next to perhaps like Duchesne and Sagan, because Mason Marchman, I think Mason Marchman is a fascinating player. And I think he's really good at certain things. And a lot of that gets lost in the fact that he just causes such a ruckus. And a lot of times that means just taking unnecessary penalties. But I mean, how awesome would Dallas's lineup look if someone like Mason

Marchman is on your fourth line? I mean, I don't think it's going to happen just that I think, If you were maximizing the lineup, I think the Granlin hints, uh, uh, ranting in line stays. And then, I don't know, maybe even Ben. I'm really not sure. I just, well, I love that. No, but David, that's a good. Yeah, sorry. No, but that's, I think you're right on because that's also where Marchant made his kind of, you know, had his big career moment in Florida was was down in, I think on the fourth line, actually. And with his, you know, goals per hour or whatever, just an absurdly high rate in Florida.

Uh, so I, I think he could be the sort of player. that maybe you also minimize the liability of his taking penalties a little bit, too, if his ice time's a little bit less down on that fourth line too. Sorry to catch you off, but I think you're on to something there with that. Whether or not they'll break up the Sagan-Marchment-Duchin-Trio, I don't know, because when they look good, they look amazing. But, yeah, I could see Marchman on the fourth line. Well, and it's interesting to think about the way,

it's interesting to think about the way that line would be talked about if the final five minutes of game seven don't happen, right? In terms of our perception of the way they played in this series, Shane takes that brutal penalty in the third that kind of at the time killed some of the momentum they've gotten from not ranted and not only scoring that first goal, but then setting up a couple chances on the following shift. And then you're like, all right, here we go again. They hadn't really been productive in this. They came through in some big moments where Tyler Say Again scores that their game three overtime winner from the Marchman play against Taves. Dushan sets up the Wyatt Johnson goal and the power play in game seven.

But I think they wound up finishing the series with three goals between the three of them and like, six penalties taken between the three of them. And so that was one area where you could probably look at and be like, all right, we need these guys to be much more efficient, especially since early on before they switched up the Johnston and Hintz lines, Pete DeBurr was feeding them a ton of offensive zone opportunities and trying to get easier matchups for them to create offensively.

And they weren't really answering the call. So it would make sense in hearing you guys talk about it. That would be the one sort of identifiable area where maybe you give them a chance to redeem themselves in game two, but also the one area where you probably could optimize your offensive situation a little bit more. They talked, too, about that line. Duchenne and Sagan have both said at different points this year that Marchment is kind of the best F-1 you could almost ask for on a line.

I remember talking to Sagan about this back in February, I think, and we were talking about Alex Rajelov, who Sagan also used to play with. And he was really good. That line with him and Ben and Sagan and Rajolov was really good for a while because Rajolov had that ability to win pucks as the first four checker and really get the cycle game going. And it didn't require you to have to force controlled zone entries if the team was really stacking the blue line because you knew you had a guy who can go in with speed and still win the puck for you.

And Marchmont has in a different sort of looking way that similar sort of quality is really lanky. He's strong and he's got that whatever you want to call it, Marchman Energy, that allows him to win those puck. So when it's working well, you love having him on your line, I would guess, as a forward. But when the frustration starts to mount, he's a player that it's hard to trust. You know, also much like Radhlov in some ways, it's hard to trust that he won't take a frustration penalty or trying to force the issue penalty down low or something like that.

So, yeah, it's an experience that has its highs and its lows, certainly. So it's a gamble either way. But when it looks good, it looks great. But the Stars will have to decide how they want to place their chips in round two. All right, we got an Alex Radula reference. That means we're officially out of time on today's show. I will let you guys plug your stuff here because I've loved the coverage that you two have put together in this round one matchup. I'm really glad we get more of it heading into round two from each of you.

Robert, I'll let you let the listeners know a little bit about your substack where they can check out your work. And then, David, you can jump in after that. Yeah, my substack is at just starsthoughts.com. Starsthots.com, all one word. A lot of stuff up there is open too, so you can just treat it like a website if substack scares you for whatever reason. But of course, if you subscribe, then you get more stuff. And I write especially some more pieces doing some like deeper dives and analysis and line combos and stuff like that or watching film. That stuff, if you're a paid subscriber, you can get that stuff too.

But overall, I've been writing pretty much every day of the playoffs, sometimes multiple times a day. And then every game I have coverage too. And then at D Magazine, David and I actually are both doing write-ups after every game kind of together. We're collaborating on something. So I guess I'll hand it off to David to talk more about what that's been like because he's better at that than I am and has been doing it for longer than I have. Are we collaborating? I feel like we just kind of right past each other. Robert puts like edits in like my section, all the good stuff that you see on my part.

It's actually Roberts. And it's a lot of fun, man. Like it's obviously a big shout to Mike Palucci, who's our editor at D Magazine. The actual one, who's doing all the things you're getting credit for. Yes. Well, he only needs to edit mine, not yours. And yeah, man, so D Magazine, fantastic. I love writing it.

Of course, love working with Robert, as I have since defending Big D days. Yeah, man. And of course. 2015. For my part, Starstack is the name of the substack. Do not be intimidated by how. aggressive substack is. We're trying to get you to become a page.

Just become a subscriber. They'll send you 10 different messages on what to do to become it. Don't do it. If you want to, great. But Starstack, I'll be doing film room analysis, statistical breakdowns because we love watching the spreadsheets here at the PDO podcast. And that's pretty much it. All right, fellas.

Well, this was awesome. As the three of us tried to get our brains together here and make sense of what we saw on Saturday night, hopefully we'll have a chance to reconvene and do this again later on in the postseason. My plugs are, if you enjoyed today's show, please go smash the five-star button and leave us a nice little review. Join us in the PDOCAST Discord as well. David is in there. We're going to have to get Robert to join us as well to keep increasing our stars contingent in there. And that's all for today. We'll be back soon with plenty more. In the meantime, thank you for listening to the Hockey

podcast streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network.