As the Stanley Cup Playoffs wind down, our focus has started to turn to the offseason. We already spent a week looking at the Seattle Kraken prospect pool, and now we are dedicating this week to free agency, which is just three weeks away. Free agency is always a tricky time.
Current state
Defining the current Seattle Kraken roster that is officially under contract is a bit nuanced, but I am going to do my best. As a starting point, from the returning players from last season’s team, the Seattle Kraken have eight forwards, six defensemen, and two goalies signed for next season.
Currently not under contract but under āteam controlā are Eeli Tolvanen and Matty Beniers, who are restricted free agents. We expect both players to be qualified and eventually signed before the season starts, so we will pencil them in without an eraser. Additionally, barring any unforeseen circumstances, we think Shane Wright is a lock to make the team next season. Shane is on his entry-level contract (ELC), so we have a number we can punch in for him.
That leaves the Kraken with 11 forwards, six defensemen, and two goalies slated for the roster in October. There are exceptions, but most teams carry the league roster maximum of 23 players by having 14 forwards, seven defensemen, and two goalies. Assuming no trades or other roster changes (e.g., buyouts, offseason injuries), this leaves the Kraken needing three forwards and one defenseman to fill the roster.
Restricted free agents
In a perfect world, the Seattle Kraken would sign their restricted free agents, Beniers and Tolvanen, before free agency opens on July 1 so they know how much money they can spend without going over the salary cap. But we know the world is not perfect, and these types of negotiations tend to linger all offseason, so for the purposes of this exercise, we will use placeholders. For any contract projections, I use Evolving-Hockey.com, which tends to provide the most accurate estimates for short- and long-term deals. The contract projections are behind their subscription model, but if you are interested in more detail and intel, check it out. It is a great site with a ton of information well beyond the contract projections.
The contract projections for Beniers vary dramatically based on the term length of the contract. Beniers could sign a ābridge dealā that will end with him still being a restricted free agent, or he could sign a long-term deal of seven or eight years. We have seen a lot of speculation about a bridge deal being likely, but I donāt think any of that is based on insider information on the negotiations and expectations. For our placeholder, we will conservatively take the most likely estimate from Evolving Hockey, which is $7 million for seven years.
Tolvanen is clearer cut, with Evolving Hockey estimating the most likely scenario as a four-year deal at $4.3 million per year. Letās punch those numbers in.
Whatās left and how could they spend it?
On Saturday, the NHL and NHLPA announced the upper limit of the salary cap for the 2024-25 season will be $88 million. With some basic arithmetic, we can estimate that the Kraken will have roughly $10 million in cap space to fill the remaining four spots. That is roughly $2.5 million per player, but of course, the team is not required or expected to spread that money evenly.
It is unlikely, but the Kraken could allocate most of that money to one player and then sign three players close to a minimum amount. For simplicity, letās call the āclose toā league minimum a $1 million cap hit per player. That would leave $7 million for one player. That would not be enough to sign the likes of top goal scorers Sam Reinhart or Jake Guentzel, but it is in the ballpark for Jonathan Marchessault and Matt Duchene. Both players are 33 years old, and even if they would want to come to Seattle, I think it is more likely that general manager Ron Francis will look elsewhere.
A more likely scenario is that Francis signs two players close to the league minimum and then spreads the additional dollars across two players. The top six defensemen seem set, with Ryker Evans slotting into the regular spot taken by Justin Schultz last season. It also appears likely that the team signs a player close to the league minimum to take the seventh-defenseman role.
Technically, Cale Fleury is already signed for next season but spent most of this last season in Coachella Valley and therefore off the Seattle Krakenās books. He is a likely candidate to compete for that seventh spot that can step in when injuries arise. Even if Fleury is slotted into that spot, I expect Francis to sign one or two defensemen to compete for that position and to provide some insurance in case of multiple injuries.
The forward roster spots are much more challenging to forecast. There could be a situation where one of the spots is filled by a prospect in the pipeline. Ryan Winterton, Logan Morrison, Jani Nyman, or even Carson Rehkopf could fit that profile. If one of the prospects doesnāt snag a place on the team, the Kraken could try to bring back Devin Shore or someone similar to fill that āclose toā league minimum spot. That would leave roughly $8 million to spend on the remaining two forward spots.
I have been mentioning the possibility of targeting Jake DeBrusk over the second half of the season and still think he is a candidate. Evolving Hockey forecasts around a $5.8 million AAV for DeBrusk, which would leave only $2.2 million for that final forward position. There might be decent hockey players available for $2.2 million a year, but not many of them put up the goals the Kraken need to add this offseason.
Other variables and considerations
- Any variance to the actual AAV for Tolvanen and Beniers will impact the cap spend available in free agency for the Kraken.
- Outside of the Expansion Draft and trade deadlines, the Kraken have not made a lot of trades. Based on comments from Ron Francis in postseason availabilities, this offseason feels different. More than a couple of times, Francis mentioned leveraging the prospect pool to make this team better. Obviously, dollars going in and/or going out will impact the cap space available in free agency.
- Although there does not appear to be any obvious buyout candidates coming up for the Seattle Kraken, any potential buyouts would open up some cap space.
- I have implied that the Kraken will spend up to the cap this offseason, but the team might keep some dry powder available going into the season to create more flexibility. The dry powder could be used if other teams need to clear cap space to do their own wheeling and dealing.
It should be clear by now that there are a lot of moving parts to manage the cap space between now and the start to the 2024-25 regular season, but hopefully this gives you a good primer into how the Kraken will approach free agency and any offseason moves related to the cap space. If you have any questions or comments, feel free to use the comments section and we can continue the dialogue there.
I was reading this and was saying to myself hey maybe Barr does know a little about hockey that was until I got the end of the article where you mention those who could fill in a spot like Shore and others. Umm well you still need to learn, no mention of the best player in Jr hockey Jagger the circus Firkus. I mean he did win the award and put up crazy stats the last couple of years. He is bigger and stronger now the he was in camp last fall. Really, Shore or a couple of the others over him. Come on man !!
At 1M/year, I would rather have Shore as the 14th forward 10 out of 10 times instead of Firkus. Firkus really needs playing time against men and the AHL is an excellent spot for that….plus it won’t burn a year of his ELC.
Shore is really an example of who you could slot in there. Ideally it is someone that can fill in for injuries that won’t be a defensive liability at less than $1.5M/year. Open to others.
Also, very rude response, JAMS. You can just not read it next time and then quietly continue on being the foremost expert on the sport.
Even I thought this was excessive… and I’m about as tone deaf as they come.
Excessive being JAMS… not you, Darren.
I agree, as much as Iād rather Firkus in the lineup over Shore I canāt see him being ready next season. A season in the AHL is probably his best option, hopefully he can make the team in a year and we keep the door open for our next generation.
The hype on Firkus from some folks is getting out of control. Let the kid play a season in the AHL against older and more physically advanced players and then see what they got. John’s points are solid on all fronts.
Appreciate the hard work of putting this together. Sadly, I don’t sense that the team has the financial muscle given the cap constraints to create a buzz among casual fans by signing any true league superstars. It reads more like careful evolution every off season. I wonder how ownership can expand its market for long-term success by proceeding in small increments. It seems as though coaching up a journeyman lineup to the playoffs every year is the path forward. At least we know the NHL playoffs are a true crap shoot where anyone has a chance to hoist the Cup.
I don’t think the team has any problem spending money for talent but depending on where they land on Matty’s contract, they won’t have the cap room to sign a true superstar. I think they do have an appetite to trade but not sure any teams really want to get rid of a superstar worth getting (i.e. under 28)
Our biggest issue is too much money in goaltending, Iād be working the phone hard to offload Gru to add some cap space. We are definitely going to be wanting that space before his contract expires better to do it sooner than later. It would be a hard sell but Iād be willing to give up a decent prospect as a sweater to get a team like NJ to take a chance on him.
Gru signing was probably the biggest mistake Francis made as to date.
I don’t know if I agree with the “crap shoot” premise. I know this has been a foundational idea in Carolina… and they’ve crapped out six years in a row. Also, when you see how often teams are back in the final, it seems like something more than luck.
Great article John. You made a tricky subject very clear. Did your analysis include holding some cap space for signing 2024 draft picks? How much would that take?
Lots of fans are going to have their own ideas about how to proceed in free agency. Personally, I like the idea of Anthony Duclair (TBL) or Sean Monahan (WPG) or maybe be even both if we fill the third forward spot with an existing CVF like Winterton.
Thanks for the great article!
Signing 2024 draft picks won’t really impact the cap. Any contracts signed by draft picks will be an ELC contract which means it will be under a $1M/year for three years. It won’t impact the salary cap until they start playing in the NHL. If their draft pick can somehow make the squad, that cap hit would have gone to someone else, so it really won’t impact the overall cap.
Separately, I do think Duclair and Monahan could fit here, and ideally it would be a complimentary piece to an even bigger offseason acquisition (via trade or free agency). I too wonder about Winterton (or Morrison) but worry if either of them makes the team, it will be as the 13th forward which means he won’t get too much playing time. That then gets be concerned about his development. tricky balance.
Nice, article John! I completely agree that getting Beniers & Tolvanen signed in the next couple weeks is important, as their cap hit for 2024-25 could swing by as much as $3M depending on contract lengths. That will define what their FA approach is. The 2nd biggest piece seems to be whether they are comfortable slotting a prospect or league min player into the 14th F & 7th D spots. That could open another $2M versus signing average bottom line players. The other big wrinkle I’m curious about is how this year’s free agency sets up the arrival of some prospects over the next couple years.
All good thoughts. I think they are comfortable with having a league min as the 14th F because last season they often did not have a 14th forward on the roster. That said, I don’t want a prospect as that 14th center because I want him playing.
The team will have a lot of $ coming off the books next season but long-range cap planning is always important.
I was thinking about this article in conjunction with your article about how playoff contenders have built their rosters. Most of the teams weād like to emulate have 3 (plus or minus) players earning $8M+ per year. The Kraken have zero, even with the extension you presumed for Matty. In a cap limited environment, it appears the name of the game is concentrating salary on a few high-end players and supplementing with players providing excess value (either because you got lucky when you signed them or more likely because theyāre early in their career). The Kraken, understandably as an expansion team, have instead taken the approach of spreading their cap space across nine $4-6M players. Eventually we need to start paying for high-end players, either those we develop, trade for, or sign. In the meantime, Iām afraid signing more players at $4M per year this offseason is counterproductive to that, especially if theyāre more than 1-year deals. Iād rather see them spend $8M on one (good!) player or else keep the roster spots open for next offseason when our prospects will be a year closer and $19.7M in AAV will be coming off the books (and needs to be replaced). In 2026 another $20.3M in AAV comes off the books too.
The time is now through 2026 to start transitioning away from being an expansion team of several okay players and instead concentrating more and more talent into fewer roster spots.
A few things I’ve been wondering about…
I know Evoking Hockey is usually spot on with their projections, but I think a bridge deal may be more likely for Beniers. I think normally -and I’m guessing that’s what EH uses – this would be considered a good fit for both sides. Right now, however, I think maybe the Kraken would prefer the immediate cap space and Beniers would prefer to “bet on himself” with a third contract. Working from that assumption creates significantly more options.
It doesn’t seem to come up much, but even with Shane Wright, the Kraken still need another center. Rather than adding another “discount” option on the fourth line, maybe move Yanni down to the “fourth” line and bring in a middle-six center. I’ve mentioned Chandler Stephenson, but maybe Sean Monahan or someone else. This would have the effect of upgrading two positions with one signing.
This may sound odd… but I think Seattle has too many forwards… maybe. No matter what they do at center, I think their best opportunity to upgrade the offense is going to be on the wing. With Tolvanen resigned, that’s eight wingers before they add. Who goes?
Personally, I really like him, but given his age, contract status, and appeal, I have to wonder if Tolvanen is an option to get moved?
Curious for other folks thoughts…
Thanks John.
Go Kraken!!!
I agree with you on the Matty projection but am being conservative in the $7M est. as a placeholder. I think it will be bridge as well but I don’t think it as locked as people seem to imply.
Stephenson/Monahan type is what I am thinking as well. I am sure this wasn’t the first time I mentioned Debrusk but I see him as similar to Stephenson and Monahan. (….and to be clear, I don’t love Debrusk but I see him as a somewhat affordable way to make this team better.)
I also agree with you on the “too many forwards”. In my dream scenario, they upgrade two forwards (by trade or FA), move two out, and hold a potential spot for a prospect that might start the season on the 4th line. That prospect could slowly move up the lineup (or down to the AHL). š
re: Tolvanen. I might have whispered this before, but I do wonder if the Kraken don’t like the $ being discussed and they are concerned about going to arbitration, do they consider not qualifying him? i.e. Dylan Strome.
I kinda blanched when you mentioned not qualifying Tolvanen… but then when I think about it… maybe that’s not so bad.
Rehkopf? That’s the “dream scenario” prospect I assume. I like that idea… except all of the sudden it’s Beniers, Wright, Kartye, Rehkopf, and Evans in your starting lineup. I like every one of those players… but that’s a lot of combined inexperience. I feel like Wright and Evans are gonna get a full season. I feel like Rehkopf is gonna get a look.
I can’t imagine them not qualifying Tolvy. On one of the most lethargic offenses in the league, in a year when literally everyone took a step back, Eeli had a career year. He played on every line and, frankly, the offense looked better (to my eye) when he was on the top line. Maybe that means his value has increased enough to trade for something better? But I just can’t see them doing that given the way he plays, his age, and how he fits on this team. I could see them signing him in the 4-5 m range and then trading one of Burky/Schwartz/Tanev to free up cap space.
No matter what there are going to be some painful decisions this offseason.
Yanni and Tanev are taking up 8 million in cap space and both of their contracts expire after this season. We are paying way too much for them as it stands and that cap space could pick up a very good player next summer. We bring up a player like āFirkusā (as mentioned earlier š) at entry level and have 7 million to acquire an upgrade to our top 6.
I would like the kraken to not be over ambitious this offseason and set up for next season. If you can clear Gru Tanev and Gourde youāve suddenly got something to work with. 14 million to sign a backup goalkeeper and a top line forward would be pretty niceā¦..
I donāt think the kraken will be patient but I feel like they should be.
Things I’m a fan of:
– Trading Tanev before the season.
– Signing DeBrusk
– Trading Gourde at the TDL.
– Trading Gru for another bad contract if you can make it happen.
– Re-signing Driedger
Things I’m not a fan of:
– Any of our young forwards not name Beniers or Wright on the roster opening night.
Things I’m Not Sure About:
– Can we get Wennberg back at a reduced cost of $3M-ish?
– Trading for the RFA rights of Necas
Tanev is fun but Kartye can take his role on similar to Evans taking on Schultz role in the second half of the season. One thing that became clear in the second call up for Wright is how much Seattle missed a net front presence in the O-zone. Wright worked to get there but I think DeBrusk is more suited for that. Great skill player that has wanted out of Boston multiple times with Seattle rumored at least once. Gourde is a good guy but it feels like his skills diminished last year. You keep him until the TDL but if you aren’t in the fight I think you move him for what you can at that point. Trading Gru is going to be difficult and probably means taking on a bad contract for another team that also hasn’t worked out. Not sure what the looks like but there are some out there. I kind of feel like Blysma is going to go with Daccord and push to bring back Driedger if they can move Gru. Just a hunch.
I’m not a fan of the forwards from the last three draft classes being on the NHL roster. Part of it was covered by John in do you really want them on the roster fighting for ice time but also because I think they all have things to work on before the NHL level – Nyman and Firkus and their skating, Morrison with his hockey IQ, Winterton with the pace. I’m missing others but they still have lots of development that may not occur at the NHL level.
My only issue with Wenneberg in his time here was I felt he was overpaid for what you got offensively. But not every player is going to produce in ways that show on a traditional stat sheet. Bring him back to play in a role closer to how the NYR played him and I think the value is there. Trading for Necas would be interesting as he fills a top 6 forward spot but what’s he going to cost? Burakovsy, one of Nyman, Firkus, Rehkopf, or Winterton, and maybe a pick? Plus he’s probably looking at a 7-9M/6 contract.
I think Driedger is a No.2 on another team.
Wennbergās tenure in NY definitely reduced his cost. He was completely invisible on offense, with 2 goals in 35 regular+playoff games (and one of them just happened to glance off his leg). He was supposed to be a two-way 3rd line center, but he ended up being more of a 4th line checker. With this in mind, I donāt really want him back either ā we need more goals, not more checkers, especially for a 3+ year contract which is what I assume it would require.
I would put Tolvi in the mid $3-$3.5 for 2-3 year range, and I think Matty will be on a 3 year bridge for $4.5-$5. He needs a little more time to develop, and he probably knows it. He also probably understands the value of bringing in some more firepower to help the team.
Duchene has made it clear he wants to stay in Dallas, and money isnāt his priority. Otherwise he would be awesome in Seattle. DeBrusk would probably be a good add, but Iām also looking at Guentzel and Marchessault. Iāve always liked Toffoli as well. Having him around for a couple years would be cool.
I donāt get the obsession with Debrusk. Heās a 20 goal, 40 point player when playing with the Bruins who have had stacked lineups for basically his entire tenure. We need someone better.
John,
Thanks for your excellent synopsis regarding the challenges facing Kraken this offseason. In looking at the roster above, a couple players just stick out – IMHO cap hits for Jaden Schwartz and Andre Burakovsky are just killing us. Do you think the team will consider buyouts to free up cap space in advance of the FA market? Using CapFriendly.com, it appears they could save $4.58mm and $4.25mm respectively buying out Burakovsky and Schwartz respectively. Based on past two years performance I don’t have any confidence they’ll be meaningful contributors going forward. Combined with existing cap space this would enable us to target a couple of high quality forwards in upcoming free agency
Iād agree with this but I donāt see the kraken buying anyone out. Iāve been very critical of Burakovsky but I would like to see him play under a new coach before giving up on him.
Do you expect them to save cap space for potential Shane Wright performance bonuses like they (mostly) did for Beniers? Four schedule A bonuses would take up another 1m.