Evaluating the Seattle Kraken 2024 NHL Draft class

by Curtis Isacke | Jul 23, 2024 | 8 comments

The 2024 NHL Draft is in the books. Today, we’ll dive deep on all eight Seattle Kraken draft picks with information from the Sound Of Hockey Big Board, three viewings at 2024 Kraken Development Camp, and all other sources of information we can muster. What kinds of players did the Kraken get? And what did Seattle tell us about the 2024 Draft with its picks? Let’s get to it.

The Kraken prospect pool before the draft

After the 2023-24 season, we put together the Sound Of Hockey consensus Seattle Kraken prospect ranking. Here was the top 10 (and ties):

Notably, the group includes only two defensemen. Ryker Evans has already amassed significant NHL ice time and projects to be a Kraken regular for the 2024-25 season. This will leave only defenseman Ville Ottavainen among the tier of projected future NHL contributors not yet playing in the NHL. There are intriguing prospects further away, including Caden Price and Lukas Dragicevic. And fan-favorite Ty Nelson will look to establish himself as a professional at the AHL level this year.

Overall, though, the team’s forward group has significantly more impact potential than its blueliners. This is mostly due to asset allocation. The team has spent only four picks in the top-three rounds of a draft on defensemen, against 10 picks on forwards. The team has also signed four undrafted free agents: three forwards and one goaltender. For these reasons, we suspected the Kraken would be more willing to invest on the blue line in the 2024 NHL Draft.

We did not focus as much on the team’s center depth, but Kraken general manager Ron Francis noted after Day 1 of the draft that Carson Rehkopf and David Goyette had moved to the wing full-time during the 2023-24 season. Assuming that position change holds into the future, the top prospect group above includes just three centers. Once factoring in Shane Wright’s likely graduation to the NHL, center depth was materializing as an important and under-discussed need as well.

The Kraken 2024 NHL Draft class

The Kraken began the 2024 NHL Draft with nine picks but traded two late-rounders (Nos. 169 and 201 overall) to Florida for one fifth-round selection (No. 141). The Kraken had previously traded their assigned fifth-round pick to Colorado for forward Tomas Tatar. The draft-day pick trade was only the second ever made by the Seattle Kraken or a team managed by Ron Francis.

Here are the eight draft picks Seattle came away with:

The team drafted five forwards, three or four of which project to play center long term, addressing a subtle organizational need. On the other hand, the team drafted just two defensemen, with the first coming in the third round. The team carried on its practice of drafting one goalie each year.

Experts give Seattle Kraken draft solid marks

Draft analysts graded Seattle’s draft positively, though typically not among the very best classes. Several questioned the team’s decision to bypass a blue chip defenseman at the top of the draft. Friend of the Sound Of Hockey Podcast Chris Peters captured the popular sentiment well, giving the Kraken a B+ grade, but with the following note:

What I do find a little concerning in the earlier days of the Kraken’s drafting, however, is the lack of high-end defensemen in their system. I don’t blame them for going for their best player available as opposed to one of the higher end defensemen when they drafted Catton, but there is going to have to come a time at some point where the team [prioritizes] defensemen in their drafting.

Chris Peters, Flo Hockey, NHL Draft Grades 2024: Here’s How All 32 Teams Did

Other notable draft experts gave Seattle the following grades:

Steven Ellis, Daily Faceoff: A-
Corey Pronman, The Athletic: B+
Rachel Doerrie, ESPN: B+
Mitchell Brown & David St-Louis, Elite Prospects: A

Kraken get solid value using a mixed draft strategy

In the end, the Kraken came away with six top-100 players on the Sound Of Hockey Big Board (tied for most in the draft) and five players in my top-100 data ranking (second-most in the draft). It was a good haul by those measures, but I’ll admit to feeling a bit of whiplash following the team’s draft strategy live, not to mention some disappointment at the continued lack of investment on defense.

Before the draft, I dug into data on the draft-eligible prospects, and I found a group of five statistical standouts at the top of the class that included four defensemen. After that I saw an average-or-worse draft class from the 40s onward. I believe the Kraken likely agreed with the latter point, but clearly held a different view of the draft’s top prospects.

After Macklin Celebrini–who was the consensus No. 1 overall prospect among scouts and data analysts alike–I saw blueliners Zeev Buium, Zayne Parekh, Artyom Levschunov, and Sam Dickinson as unique offensive defensemen. Buium’s 50 points in 42 NCAA games were the most ever by a first-time eligible NCAA defenseman. Parekh’s 96 points in 66 junior games was the most by a CHL defenseman in more than 30 years. Levschunov’s 35 points in 38 games were the most ever by a first-time eligible NCAA defenseman standing 6-foot-2 or taller. And Dickinson’s 70 points in 68 games were the second-most by an OHL defenseman standing 6-foot-3 or taller in the last 30 years.

Seeing an opportunity where supply met a need, I thought the Kraken would be thrilled to select any of these prospects if they were still available at pick No. 8. As it turns out, Buium, Parekh, and Dickinson were all available when the Kraken were on the clock. The team went a different direction anyway.

From a raw point production perspective, Berkly Catton out-produced all of the defensemen I named. In fact, he is one of only four first-time eligible CHL players this century to score 50+ goals and total 115+ points. The others are two soon-to-be Hall of Famers and the reigning Calder Trophy winner: Sidney Crosby, Patrick Kane, and Connor Bedard.

Looking at scoring data only, I had Catton as the sixth-ranked first-time eligible skater in the 2024 NHL Draft, ahead of each of the defensemen except Buium. Even so, I ranked Catton slightly lower than the four defensemen listed above in my final data ranking, which accounts for size (Catton is 5-foot-10), league value (Catton’s WHL is weaker than the OHL and NCAA), and relative positional value.

I suspect Seattle decided to go with Catton for one of two reasons. First, the team may have viewed offense, from a player who could be an NHL center, as the greatest organizational need. Second, the team’s scouts may not have been sold on the high-scoring blueliners, each of whom came with his own set of questions.

Also, we cannot entirely rule out the value the organization may see in drafting locally. Indeed, after Catton, the team stayed local drafting another WHL center in Julius Miettinen. Miettinen was well-regarded by most scouts, checking in at No. 41 on the Sound Of Hockey Big Board. My data score ranking had him as a second-rounder too (No. 61 overall). So, the selection didn’t stray far from consensus value.

After that, though, the Kraken draft pivoted hard toward idiosyncratic scouting favorites. I suspect this is because the remainder of Seattle’s top targets that combined in-house scouting support and strong data profiles went off the board before Seattle’s next pick in a relatively shallow talent pool.

Nathan Villeneuve, Seattle’s pick at No. 63, is a checking center with the potential to push his scoring higher with more ice time. He was No. 91 on the Big Board and No. 71 in my data ranking. Likewise, the team’s pick at No. 73, defenseman Alexis Bernier, was drafted higher than those in the public community or my data analysis suggested (No. 122 on the Big Board; No. 341 in my data ranking). Ollie Josephson, the team’s fourth-round pick, was liked by scouts both in Seattle and elsewhere (No. 77 on the Big Board), but, again, his data lagged (No. 226 in my data ranking).

Toward the end of the draft, the team turned back towards strong data players who had dropped. The Kraken selected forward Clarke Caswell (No. 53 in my data rank) and defenseman Jakub Fibigr (No. 37 on the data) with its final two picks.

Kraken draft picks by the numbers: young, small, and junior-heavy

The Kraken selected the youngest draft class in the league—with an average age of 18 years, two months as of the 2024 NHL Draft. The class is more than a full year younger on average than the league’s oldest class, drafted by the Vegas Golden Knights. (Coincidentally, the Kraken’s three youngest 2024 NHL Draft picks, Kim Saarinen, Josephson, and Fibigr, were all born on the same day—July 22, 2006.)

Seattle was also one of eight teams not to select any re-draft candidates. Earlier in the organization’s development, Seattle selected several overage prospects because there were no prospects from earlier drafts blocking their path. This year’s approach is indicative of a pipeline with a steady flow of prospects ahead of the 2024 class.

Beyond drafting young, the Kraken also selected a class of relatively small players. Seattle took the second-shortest skater class in the league, with their seven drafted skaters averaging just a shade over 6-foot-0. (The team also selected goaltender Kim Saarinen, who stands 6-foot-4.) Their skater class is also the fifth-lightest, averaging under 182 pounds. By contrast, the Boston Bruins class of skaters stood almost 6-foot-4 and 204 pounds on average, both the top marks in the league.

Finally, no team committed more draft resources to Canadian junior hockey players than the Kraken. Seattle selected seven players from the CHL, tied with the Calgary Flames for most in the league. Seattle’s four draft picks from the WHL were the most of any team.

Scouting the Kraken draft picks

Scouting notes: “Berkly Catton is one of the most fun players to watch in this draft. Give him time and space, and he’ll make you pay; try to take it away, and he’ll cut through your formation anyway like a hot knife through butter.

“It’s on the rush where he’s most effective. A series of crossovers allows him to build speed as he plans his attack, reading and reacting to what’s in front of him, using a series of weight shifts and handling moves to navigate the neutral zone as he drives play toward the opposition goal. With this ability comes cunning in the form of a sophisticated delay game that allows him to level up and attack with support or connect with trailing linemates as they enter the play.” – Elite Prospects

Pick analysis: At development camp we saw a player who combines instant-adrenaline skating with elite ice vision and self-confidence. He’s the team’s most dynamic offensive playmaker at any level and should be a one-man solution to the Kraken power play within three years.

Full analysis: Seattle Kraken draft Berkly Catton at No. 8 in the 2024 NHL Draft

Scouting notes: “Miettinen is a well-built, strong, 6-foot-3 center who works, wins battles, plays hard and can skate. He’s got some soft skill and power to his game. He protects the puck well and can play along the wall or go to the front of the net and make plays around the crease.” – Scott Wheeler, The Athletic

Pick analysis: Miettinen brings a player profile the Kraken system is currently lacking—a physically imposing, two-way forward who projects to stick at center long term. Elite Prospects compares him to Charlie Coyle or Boone Jenner. Like those players, his game at development camp looked simple, but on closer inspection you start to understand how he intelligently puts himself in positions to win more than his share of battles and grind out the production a team needs to win.

Full analysis: What the Seattle Kraken got in Julius Miettinen, pick No. 40 in the 2024 NHL Draft

Scouting notes: “[Villeneuve’s] an all-around forward who plays with good pace and isn’t afraid to mix it up along the boards. Villeneuve loves to spend time causing havoc in front of the net and plays a strong off-puck game compared to many others around this point in the list. His energy and feistiness will give him a shot in the NHL, even if he doesn’t have the pure skill to burn.” – Steven Ellis, Daily Faceoff

Pick analysis: I watched at least a half-dozen of Villeneuve’s games between monitoring David Goyette and getting a feel for Sudbury’s 2024 NHL Draft prospects. His physical edge, not to mention a fight or two, always stood out. So too did his pro-ready movements and game. He’s not flashy, but it all looks NHL-translatable, at least in a depth role. Scouts see a center in the long term, perhaps as a third-liner or an outstanding fourth-line player. Villeneuve didn’t stand out at development camp, but he plays a game that should shine brighter when the physicality ratchets up in training camp.

Full analysis: What the Seattle Kraken got in Nathan Villeneuve, pick No. 63 in the 2024 NHL Draft

Scouting notes: “He’s a fast, agile defenseman who really knows how to utilize his skating ability. He loves using it to keep the tempo high, whether that’s with his gap control, man-to-man defending, breaking pucks out, or activating from the offensive blueline. Despite not being overly big he really plays hard and with an edge. He might never be a true specialist on either side of special teams, but he’ll be someone who can comfortably handle the responsibilities of both.

“The Drakkar are going to be top contenders in the QMJHL for the next two seasons, and Bernier seems like the type of player who elevates his game to new heights during a deep playoff run and then never looks back.” – McKeen’s

Pick analysis: Bernier’s a fluid mover and adept puck handler, and he was one of his junior team’s best players at breaking out of the defensive zone. Perhaps his strongest trait, according to scouts, is his hockey sense, which allows him to diagnose and shut down opposing offensive chances before they materialize. On the other hand, I don’t see clear winning traits in the offensive zone, which raises developmental questions.

Full analysis: What the Seattle Kraken got in Alexis Bernier, pick No. 73 in the 2024 NHL Draft

Scouting notes: “His 6-foot-4 frame does offer some clear advantages, especially covering high when he’s down… but he plays a surprisingly active style for someone of his stature. He keeps excellent access to his edges and remains patient when the puck is passed around the zone, capable of making quick adjustments in either direction… He’s also a difficult goaltender to beat on clean shots because of his above-average tracking ability.” – Elite Prospects

Pick analysis: We “predicted” this pick before the draft. Saarinen looked solid overall at development camp after giving up a number of goals over his shoulders on day one. Interestingly, the Kraken decided to make Saarinen the first Seattle draft pick selected outside the first round to sign an NHL contract during the summer of his draft year. He’ll be one to follow in Finland this year.

Scouting notes: “Josephson is the type of forward who will always earn more love from coaches than from fans. He’s a steady center who is rarely one of the most skilled players on the ice but is usually among the smartest and the hardest working.” – McKeen’s

Pick analysis: Josephson’s an impressive athlete who moves well–even if the skating could still be cleaned up a bit. He brings pace in transition and is committed in every aspect of the checking game. I’d expect his scoring production to take a step forward in his draft-plus-one season. It’s easy enough to imagine a checking role as a professional. Whether he tops out in the NHL or AHL remains to be seen, though.

Scouting notes: “He’s so, so smart with how he times almost every move he makes on the ice. Finding open ice off the puck, creating open ice with it in every zone of the ice, reading breakouts and stopping defensive zone cycles, it’s just wonderful to watch… He absolutely needs to work on the skating as many have pointed out but I don’t think it’s that big of an issue, and the data indicates that if he improves there, he could be an elite player considering how good his output is already.” – Scouching

Pick analysis: Caswell’s junior scoring data justified a much higher selection. Before the draft I had him listed–along with Fibigr, actually–as an “alternative” for Seattle at No. 73. Caswell’s scoring touch was evident at development camp. The question with him is can he develop the complimentary skills necessary to succeed at a professional level. There is a solid baseline here, though.

Scouting notes: “He has a very well-rounded skill set. His mobility is above average, with his ability to build speed quickly out of cuts and pivots being his best strength. This helps him have a real positive impact on the transition game as he skates away from pressure and initiates the breakout.” – McKeen’s

Pick analysis: Like Caswell, Fibigr’s scoring data implied a much earlier draft pick. He also looked strong in his activations at development camp, even if the defense was an adventure at times. Fibigr reminds me a bit of Ryker Evans both in stature and in their draft-year profiles. Evans ultimately went undrafted in his first-eligible draft, only to be selected in the second round by the Kraken as an overager. I suspect Fibigr could follow a similar development path and could have been a much higher pick next year if the Kraken didn’t snatch him in the seventh round. A lot hinges on Fibigr’s ability to make defensive improvements.

The Deep Sea draft

In case you’re curious, I made an alternative “Deep Sea draft” for the Seattle Kraken as the draft was ongoing using my watchlist and pre-draft work. I assumed the same late-round trade the Kraken actually made.

Having seen Catton up close at development camp, I admit that it’s tough for me to contemplate a draft class without him now. Furthermore, my draft does not address the team’s need for depth at center, which I have come to appreciate more after looking at it since the draft. My draft also does not address a common criticism I saw of Seattle’s haul—that it included too many smaller players. My group has a similar average height and weight to the real Kraken class. In the end, it’ll be interesting to compare years down the road.

8 Comments

Boist on July 23, 2024 at 10:51 am

The Kraken now have 5 top 100 prospects according to the athletic: Wright, Catton, Rehkopf, Firkus, and Goyette. Only 3 teams have 6. The farm is in pretty good shape!

I’d also like to add, it seems to me that scouting and/or the development curve just seem to be different for D-men and goalies. I was a Hawks fan when Forsling was there, and he showed flashes, but was overall very unimpressive. Now, he’s a top Dman on the Stanley Cup winner and has the #1 best contract in the NHL according to the Athletic. Spencer Knight and Devon Levi were supposed to be all world goaltenders, and they have been underwhelming, while Joey Daccord pretty much came out of nowhere last year. It just seems like scouts can now predict a skater’s scoring impact in the NHL with decent accuracy, but for D-men and goalies, there is a lot more variability. Maybe this is partly why the Kraken chose Catton, to go with a more sure thing.

Loading...

Reply
- Curtis Isacke on July 23, 2024 at 11:01 am
  
  I think you’re onto something here. There is research–research I’ve mentioned in these articles in the past–suggesting that highly-drafted forwards hit a higher rate. Forwards may just be inherently more projectable because there is a bigger sample size on what they’re ultimately going to be paid to do: score.
  
  Straying a tad more into the anecdotal, I also think high-end scoring is the hardest thing to obtain outside the draft. We talk a lot about right-shot defensemen rarely moving, but the Kraken were able to sign a top-of-the-lineup RD (Montour) this offseason. Top-of-the-lineup scoring forwards seem harder to get. The Kraken are going on year 4 and are still looking for one. The forwards that do move (like Burakovsky or Bjorkstrand) tend to be a tier lower.
  
  All of this supports the premise that you should keep taking swings on scoring talent at the top of the draft. You can backfill size or defense later. I’m fully on board there. It just seemed like this draft had a few unique scoring defensemen available. Only time will tell if those players turn into unicorn-types their data suggests. I can say I like what I saw from Catton at development camp.
  
  Loading...
  
  Reply
Nicholas on July 23, 2024 at 5:03 pm

Excellent article as always, Curtis.

Loading...

Reply
Daryl W on July 23, 2024 at 5:26 pm

When it comes to projecting prospects… I’m really looking forward to comparing three former prospects who will be full time NHLers this season: Juraj Slafkovsky, Logan Cooley and Shane Wright. Given how different each of their development paths have been and how similarly their teams are positioned this year, it will be curious to see where each of them is at this season.

Loading...

Reply
harpdog on July 23, 2024 at 6:24 pm

Another Great Article. Choosing players should have a specific agenda. I feel you build a team with players that fit into the system you are building. Too many teams choose players by stats but in reality, it is a system that wins games, not individual stats. This, I feel is the reason certain teams are always in the top of their divisions and consitantly win. Team players and unselfish players do not show up in stats or charts and this is where good scouts earn their money.
I have this little voice in my head telling “why are these guys, ranked so high and are not being chosen in the sense of the Kraken”

Loading...

Reply
- Curtis Isacke on July 25, 2024 at 11:58 am
  
  Agree with this. I’m fairly confident any outside critique we could have, they would have an answer for–rooted in on-ice data or scouting input. Best to reserve judgment. I provide the grades of others because they’re a way to get expert thoughts, but I’ve never really considered assigning a subjective grade to a draft myself. Too many unknowns to provide anything worthwhile–including how the pieces will ultimately fit together or match a specific philosophy, as you mention.
  
  Loading...
  
  Reply
Chuck Holmes on July 24, 2024 at 1:41 pm

“three or four of which project to play center long term.”

How are you able to make this judgement now, given what Goyette and Rehkopf just experienced?

What are the characteristics that make a drafted C into an NHL potential C?

Loading...

Reply
- Curtis Isacke on July 25, 2024 at 9:13 am
  
  Good question, and, ultimately, it is all just a subjective projection. So, you’re right in reserving judgment to see how it plays out.
  
  The reports I saw on Miettinen, Villeneuve, and Josephson all suggest the defense, work ethic, and physicality necessary to hold up down the middle and below the circles in the defensive zone, and also to get to the net front offensively.
  
  Goyette and Rehkopf were always more pure scorer-types. Both never struck me as bringing a ton of defensive value, so from the jump they both struck as more wingers. But they did continue to play junior center for a while. And post-draft at least Robert Kron spoke at length about how they thought Rehkopf brought two-way value. Still, it seems like the center experiment may be ending for those guys.
  
  For the record, Catton does initially strike me as a winger too. But Francis was discussed him as a center post-draft when explaining why Catton and not a defenseman. And Catton may be special enough in transition/on offense, that you can live with his other limitations at center. Still, for me, Catton is more like a super-rich man’s Goyette. I don’t see the defensive chops there–at least, not yet.
  
  More concretely you could look at things like faceoff %–particularly in the extreme. Rehkopf was consistently among the very worst in the OHL at faceoffs, which raised some red flags about the center thing for me. Goyette was also quite poor (45%). No such issues with Miettinen, Villeneuve, Josephson–or Catton for that matter. All were 53%+ on the dot in ’23-24. (Villeneuve was elite at ~60%.)
  
  Loading...
  
  Reply