Hey Heika: 'It's been a bit,' as Tyler Seguin would say

Howdy folks, to quote Tyler Seguin, "it's been a bit."
Reading Twitter has been a bit of a challenge for the past three or four months, and I know you guys have a lot to discuss. This seems like the best place to do it. Hey Heika returns with a flurry, so buckle up and hold on.

After 20 years of following you, we're on the same page. Playing not to lose won't work against good teams. They can get a lead and shut down the Stars. And it's all on coaching. Why do you think they kept this staff? Is Jim Nill happy to be a bubble team? -- @Call4Rod
Mike Heika: Hey Rod, your tweet was what inspired me to do a Hey Heika today. My guess is you're responding to what I said on the podcast about how I wish the Stars would start with more intensity and not have to stage so many comebacks, and I do feel there's a philosophical area of discussion that can be broached. But I'm not a big fan of the thought that this organization has problems with coaching or mindset that goes back for years.
I know many fans, you included, don't think the organization has the right philosophy or the right coaching staff, and that's a fair criticism. My take is they believe they're building a team that can win in the playoffs, and they feel that style should get them in comfortably during the regular season. What they'd like to do is play strong defense and then allow that to create offensive opportunities.
It's what Ken Hitchcock wanted to do, it's what Jim Montgomery wanted to do, it's what Rick Bowness wants to do. It's a style of hockey that has proven successful for many organizations. While a more exciting brand of offensive hockey would be fun, teams that have embraced that style - Toronto, Edmonton - have had its own problems in the playoffs. Heck, even Colorado fans are worried that their team might not be built for the postseason.
I know many fans will look at Tampa Bay and say that's the model, but the Lightning have the best goalie in hockey and one of the best defensemen, and it still took them several years - and an influx of physicality and defense - before they were able to win the Cup. It's a challenging puzzle.
This year will determine a great deal for Dallas. The Stars have had two good playoff runs in the past two season where they've made the postseason. Does that mean their philosophy is good? This year could go a long way in determining that. If they miss the playoffs, big chances will be coming. If they go out in the first round, you could see them make some moves.
It's the same for a lot of teams.
Would I like them to be more consistent in starting games and producing possession numbers that put them in the top 10 in the league? Definitely. Is that all on the coaching staff? No, I think the players, coaches and front office all share in what they are right now. The Stars often do many things the right way, but then they slip and have letdowns. I think that's the case for most sports teams. Dallas is 5-1-0 in its last six games. It's 19-9-1 in its past 29. That means it's doing a pretty good job, and that's a credit to the players, coaches and front office.
I'm curious for the philosophical basis that the coaching staff has adopted. It seems the team struggles for goals yet scratches the offensive weapons in favor of defensive players. And yet the defense is not as strong as it has been over the last few years. Thoughts? -- @flyboy19901
Heika:It's a balancing act in which there are human beings involved, so it's tough to say they're doing things all wrong or all right. The knee-jerk reaction when Denis Gurianov gets scratched is to say the coaches can't develop young players. But how did they develop Jason Robertson or Roope Hintz or Jacob Peterson? Had Robertson not been able to make poised plays at crucial points in big games, he wouldn't be given the opportunity he's getting. So, is that on the coach or the individual?
This coaching staff needs details in its defense and needs the players to be playing as a unit. If there's a breakdown, it frustrates them. This team also has a very thin margin for error, so mistakes are magnified. If you look at Gurianov's minutes, he's been given great opportunities while playing with some talented linemates. His numbers are solid at 11 goals, 18 assists, 29 points and plus-3. Should he have been scratched the other night? I can see why he was. I could also understand if Alexander Radulov or Radek Faksa was chosen. The game isn't always fair. Sometimes, contracts and experience make decisions for the coaching staff.
As for saying that scratching Gurianov (or Thomas Harley, for that matter) when the team needs offense is confusing, well maybe. But it all has to fit together. The team is winning games while the coaches are making these decisions, and that's really the stat they're most worried about.
Assuming the Stars make the playoffs (wild card most likely), do you think they care if they draw Colorado or Calgary, or do you think they really don't want to play one of these two teams? -- @MilesButtrill
Heika: I actually don't. In a perfect world, they'd be higher in the standings, get home ice in the first round and life would be great. However, they're where they are, and they seem confident in whoever the opponent might be. The bubble was different, but this team beat Calgary, Colorado and Vegas in the 2020 playoffs, and that created a pretty calm mindset. Bring on the best, and the feeling is the Stars will be ready for them.
What do the Stars do with goaltending moving into (hopefully) playoffs and next year as well? -- @rewdy214
Heika:It's a great question. Scott Wedgewood's in a great place and likely will play Saturday or Sunday, so he'll add to his resume and create more information for decision-making when it comes to this season. If Braden Holtby looks ready at some point (and the team has the opening to test him in a game), he'll likely become an option for the playoffs. They love his experience and wouldn't mind him being a backup. That said, if Wedgewood continues to play well, then he could make the decision on Holtby's health a little easier. Jake Oettinger is the No. 1 goalie, and he'll get every opportunity to stay there, so that's the short-term plan.
As for long-term, Oettinger is the man, and the backup will have to be decided by performance and contracts. Ben Bishop has a year left on his deal but will simply be on long-term IR all next season. Anton Khudobin has a year left on his contract, and his options will depend on his health. If he's ready to go in the fall, the Stars could look at him as an option to back up Oettinger. More likely, they'd try to trade him or consider buying out the final year of his $2.2 million contract.
Holtby and Wedgewood can each become unrestricted free agents after the season, and whoever plays better down the stretch or in the playoffs is the likely candidate to back up next season. The fact either might sign a short-term deal at a low cap hit could be important when you consider Oettinger will be a restricted free agent looking for a significant raise.
We as fans have a lot of opinions on who should play and who should be scratched. Which forward with low offensive production cannot be scratched, in your opinion, and why? -- @FumbleBee17
Heika:The obvious answer is Radulov. He has struggled to score this year, with just four goals, and he makes defensive mistakes and takes bad penalties at times. But he's also an accomplished veteran who tries very hard and has earned a lot of respect from the coaching staff as he has navigated injuries and a reduction in playing time. So that goes into the decision. You could also say that Faksa has struggled at times this year (minus-150 on SAT, which is second worst on the team), a team worst minus-17 on plus-minus, and just four goals among 15 points. But Faksa's a huge part of what the coaching staff wants to do defensively, and so they feel he helps win games.
I get that scratching Gurianov is frustrating, but the coaches are trying every day to get the most out of this lineup. We'll see if they've picked correctly.
I was looking at Seguin's career stats. From 2013 to 2019 he was a point a game player and scored 70+ points in every one of those seasons. What percentage chance do you give that we see Tyler score 70+ points in a single season again? -- @MilesButtrill
Heika:It's a legitimate question when you consider Seguin just turned 30 and has five years remaining on a contract that averages $9.85 million in salary cap hit. Clearly, Seguin has been slowed by a series of lower body injuries and operations over the past five seasons, and that has affected his ability to be an explosive offensive player. He has 19 goals this season, so that is not ridiculously bad, and he's still one of the team's best faceoff guys, so he gets his minutes.
But is there a chance he can get back to the numbers he used to produce?
There's a chance. I look at Steven Stamkos in Tampa Bay. He's 32 and was slowed by injuries for two seasons. He has 73 points in 65 games this year, so he's back to normal. Could Seguin do that if he gets completely healthy? Sure, why not. He plays on the first power play and typically gets big minutes in offensive situations, so the opportunity should be there.
Plus, with his contract, the Stars really have no choice but to give him the ice time and see what he can do with it.
Why does Bowness insist on sitting young guys for mistakes that he lets vets get away with? I feel like when watching Harley, he has improved throughout the year and is at least as good if not better than Joel Hanley or Andrej Sekera but he's usually the scratch. -- @DShadows26
Heika: It's the way of the coach, really. They're focused on winning the next game, and so they make these decisions. Rick Carlisle was criticized for doing the same thing with the Mavericks. Ken Hitchcock was criticized for doing the same things with the Stars. It's just what they do.
Veteran players get more rope. That's just the way of pro sports. Somehow, good young players still find a way to earn minutes in that world, and that seems like the process that players like Gurianov or Harley have to go through.
Will the Stars try to resign John Klingberg in the offseason before free agency? If not, who can the Stars sign to replace him? -- @ShortDJMINE88
Heika:The tough part about the Klingberg situation is that both sides are right. Klingberg has given the Stars several years as a bargain, and he probably needs to get paid for the money he has left on the table. Yet the Stars have to look at what it would be to give a 30-year-old player a deal that could be as many as eight years, and how would that contract age? When you look at the deals for Jamie Benn and Seguin, the aging process doesn't look great. When you look at the deals for Joe Pavelski and Ryan Suter, it's working out pretty well. So, what do you do with Klingberg?
I know he wants to stay. I know he's important to the team. The problem is you have big raises coming for Robertson ($795,000 and pending RFA), Roope Hintz ($3.15 million for one more year) and Oettinger ($925,000 and pending RFA), and that money has to come from someplace. It's difficult to foresee that there will be room for Klingberg. The guess is they hope to have a great playoff run and then maybe try to flip him before free agency starts. My guess is if they try to sign anyone, it would be on a two or three-year deal. Otherwise, they might just let Harley take the minutes, and move forward with the group they have (Heiskanen, Lindell, Suter, Hakanpaa, Hanley).
When is Joel Kiviranta going to be back in the lineup? -- @BattlehawksUFFS
Heika:He's got a pretty hard path to get back in right now. Jacob Peterson's playing great, and they really want to see what they have in Marián Studenič and Vladislav Namestnikov.
Valeri Nichushkin's killing it in Colorado. Does this shed some light on the Stars' lack of player development in players like Kiviranta, Gurianov and others? -- @AWoelfling
Heika: It's a great question. Nichushkin has 19 goals among 40 points in 50 games for Colorado. Certainly not something you expected from a player who was bought out by the Stars. But the Avalanche clearly have found the right fit for the former first-round pick and deserves credit for that. The Stars also deserve some criticism. On one hand, you look at a player like Nazem Kadri and his improvement from his time in Toronto and say that the Avalanche just know what they're doing. On the other hand, you look at a player like Jack Campbell, and his stalled development in Dallas, and say that the Stars have a bad track record.
It's a question they have to ask themselves. Now, in the meantime, Dallas has developed Robertson, Hintz, Miro Heiskanen and Oettinger, so that goes to show that players are humans, and you're going to get mixed results.
It's frustrating, but the team's trying to make decisions every day on how to best bring players forward. Those decisions work for some players and not for others, and it all goes into the "permanent record" of the management and coaches. If the balance tips too far to the negative, then sports teams make changes.
Favorite April Fool's Joke? -- @FJGreene
Heika: I actually don't like them. I don't watch "prank shows" because they stress me out. That said, the Sidd Finch ruse by Sports Illustrated in 1985 was very well executed.
Any insight regarding the odds/timing/determining factors for a Bowness extension (or not extending him)? -- @cgeear19
Heika: I think so much of this depends on what happens in the playoffs. Bowness is 67, so he understands how all of this works. If the team performs well, there's a chance he could come back. If it doesn't, there's a chance he won't return. That's sort of the life for all NHL coaches, but especially for one at his age.
This story was not subject to the approval of the National Hockey League or Dallas Stars Hockey Club.
Mike Heikais a Senior Staff Writer for DallasStars.com and has covered the Stars since 1994. Follow him on Twitter @MikeHeika, and listen to his podcast.