Just moments after free agency opened on July 1 the Seattle Kraken stole headlines, announcing the team had signed defenseman Brandon Montour to a seven-year, $50 million contract. The move may have been a bit of “zag” for those expecting a forward addition, but Montour was a premier piece. And the importance of a high-end offensive defenseman was on display just months earlier when the Kraken entered a late-season nosedive following Vince Dunn’s injury. (Blaiz Grubic broke down the Montour signing for us.)
Yet, as Kraken fans and media basked in the Montour news believing it to be Seattle’s one big splash, a second report struck like lightning: The Seattle Kraken were also signing former Vegas Golden Knights center Chandler Stephenson to a seven-year, $43.75 million deal.
Huh.
With the benefit of time, there is a lot we can say about the Stephenson deal. Stephenson will play a vital role as a short-term shield for Matty Beniers and Shane Wright–and an Alex Wennberg replacement–who can take difficult matchups and play in all situations. If the team wanted to be competitive this year, it needed someone to take on that role. And Stephenson brings more transition and finishing skill than Wennberg, so the team should see at least a modest bump in offensive production from that role.
That said, the seven-year bet on a 30-year-old forward with limited overall offensive and defensive value brings questions. It may be a move Kraken management felt like it “needed” to make–particularly since it faced offseason pressure from ownership to be competitive. But the deal has potential to be an anchor almost immediately, not to mention years five through seven.
While the salary cap will go up and ease the contract burden down the road, the short-term opportunity cost from a cap and roster construction perspective is high. I do not know if other free agents were realistically available to the team, and Stephenson was one of just a couple of centers available that can play a top-six role.
But the team is now in a cap crunch and may need to retain money or attach an asset to a player in a trade to obtain needed cap flexibility. This underscores that the cost of the Stephenson strategy goes beyond his $6.25 million AAV cap hit.
In the end, two things can be true at once. The deal may end up being a painful one for Seattle, but if the Kraken claw their way back into the playoffs this season, Stephenson will be a critical reason why, and to some extent, that makes it worth it. Let’s get into it.
The Stephenson signing mitigates a key loss, fills an important role
The Kraken entered the offseason knowing they needed to improve. But the first step in getting better is not getting worse. And after last season’s deadline trade of Alex Wennberg, the team undoubtedly got worse.
“When we couldn’t get something done with Wennberg at the deadline, it left a big hole for us,” Francis told the media on July 1 after the Stephenson deal was announced. “So, getting Chandler to add to our lineup is a huge addition.”
As mentioned above, much of the team’s struggles down the stretch last season may be ascribed to the contemporaneous injury to No. 1 defenseman Vince Dunn, but Wennberg played an underappreciated and important role on the team.
First, the Kraken trusted Wennberg with the most difficult even-strength situations. One way a team “shelters” a player or a line is by deployment “on the fly,” i.e., in the flow of play as opposed to after a stoppage. In this regard it is notable that the Kraken did just the opposite with Wennberg. As of the trade last season, Wennberg led all Kraken forwards in deployments for face-offs, and defensive-zone face-offs specifically.
According to Evolving Hockey, Wennberg also faced a more difficult average even strength “quality of competition”–i.e., quality of players he was on the ice against–than any other Kraken player.
Second, Wennberg led all Kraken skaters in special teams minutes, which are by definition higher leverage.
These are vital minutes, and the team certainly believed that it would be a tall order to ask Shane Wright–in his first full NHL season–or Matty Beniers–coming off a challenging campaign–to assume those roles. At the very least, a team with playoff aspirations would risk exposing an Achilles heel without an alternative plan.
Enter Chandler Stephenson, who led all Las Vegas Golden Knights forwards who played at least 20 games played in the 2023-24 season in even-strength (1) total face-off starts per game played (13.7), (2) defensive-zone face-offs per game played (4.2), and (3) quality of competition, as measured by Evolving Hockey. In each instance, his numbers were nearly identical on a per-game basis to Wennberg’s numbers.
Not only that, Stephenson averaged more than a minute-and-a-half shorthanded and almost three minutes on the power play per game, for a per-game total of 4:30 per game on special teams. This would have topped all Kraken forwards, narrowly edging Wennberg, and ranked 42nd overall in the 2023-24 season in special teams time per game.
The Kraken knew simply giving Wennberg’s gloves to another Kraken forward wasn’t enough. Before the team could improve, it needed to replace Wennberg’s role in the lineup. And no other player on the 2024 free-agent market (short of Elias Lindholm) so perfectly fit the bill as Stephenson.
Stephenson’s sneaky skill set fits what the Kraken want to do
When the media assembled around Kraken general manager Ron Francis on July 1, Francis explained the signing by saying “Stephenson is a really good two-way guy who plays with pace [and] has a sneaky skill set,” before going on to mention the added value of Stephenson’s championship experience.
From a pure point production standpoint, Stephenson doesn’t stand out, even on a talented Golden Knights roster. His 51 points ranked 127th in the league in the 2023-24 season.
But Stephenson does have clear standout traits if you turn on the tape. First and foremost, his skill in transition and ability to push play north-south stands out immediately (see video at 1:43).
Over the course of the offseason, the team has made clear that it wants to prioritize a high-speed, rush-based attack as a team identity. On July 1, Francis said, “Stephenson has a lot of pace to his game, and that’s the way we like to play.” On April 22, as the team was contemplating the dismissal of coach Dave Hakstol, Francis mentioned that the team needed to get back to its identity as a “fast” team.
This is Stephenson’s strength. And if he helps the team play with more pace, it has the potential to unlock the most dangerous skills of the team’s other relatively recent big-money free-agent forward signing, Andre Burakovsky.
Stephenson may not rank among the fastest in the league in a 1-on-1 race, particularly at this stage in his career, but he plays with a relentless pace that can wear down the opposition.
He averaged 10.31 miles per hour at even strength during the 2023-24 season according to NHL Edge data, which ranked 60th overall in the league and would have been fifth-fastest on the Seattle Kraken, behind only Matty Beniers, Andre Burakovsky, Yanni Gourde, and Brandon Tanev.
Stephenson uses his speed to create scoring chances. According to data tracked by Corey Sznajder of All Three Zones, Stephenson was in the top 15 percent of the league in the 2023-24 season creating controlled zone entries into the offensive zone leading directly to a scoring chance. His statistics from previous seasons are even stronger, closer to the top five percent in the league.
His passing skill, particularly his ability to set up high-danger opportunities for his teammates, also stands out on tape.
Though his numbers were down in this regard in 2023-24, according to All Three Zones, Stephenson has been an above-average facilitator of dangerous opportunities over the last four seasons in Vegas.
Stephenson’s overall on-ice impacts are lackluster
That said, though Stephenson can dictate terms with skill in some ways, his overall on-ice shot impacts are fairly weak. Kraken fans no doubt recall with some frustration Wennberg’s inability to generate his own shots on goal. Wennberg has generated 4.24 shots on goal per 60 minutes on ice for his career. Yet, Stephenson has produced just 4.32 shots on goal per 60 minutes. (For reference, Stephenson’s career shot rate is the lowest among forwards projected to the 2024-25 Kraken roster; Brandon Tanev is the next lowest with 5.91 shots on goal per 60 minutes for his career.)
In terms of individual shot quality, Wennberg and Stephenson are again similar: Wennberg’s shots could be expected to generate .52 goals per 60 minutes, with Stephenson only slightly better at .61 expected goals per 60 minutes. (Stephenson’s career rate is again the lowest among forwards projected to Seattle’s 2024-25 roster.)
This hints at the broader concern. Overall team shot quality with Stephenson on the ice is a problem. Sorting through Natural Stat Trick‘s forward line tool, there are very few forward combinations where a companion Golden Knights player saw better shot quality outcomes with Stephenson on the ice rather than without him.
The most egregious and well-cited example is Mark Stone. Over the last three seasons, Stephenson and Stone played 1370 minutes together even strength and generated 51.9 percent of overall shot quality during that time. This is good. But the Golden Knights generated 60.6 percent of overall shot quality with only Stone but not Stephenson on the ice. In the reverse scenario–with only Stephenson and not Stone–Vegas generated only 47.8 percent of overall shot quality.
This same pattern repeated with many of Stephenson’s teammates. Data analysts use these disparities to ascribe relative play-driving impacts to individual players. And, as you might surmise, Stephenson has graded quite poorly. This past season, Evolving Hockey had Stephenson’s overall quality impacts once accounting for quality of competition and teammates in the eighth percentile in the league (i.e. bottom 10 percent).
HockeyViz–which provides visual mapping of shot quality outcomes attributed to a player–shows that Vegas generated fewer dangerous opportunities offensively (six percent below average) with Chandler Stephenson on the ice rather than off the ice (three percent above average). Likewise, the Golden Knights conceded more dangerous chances (18 percent worse than average) with Stephenson on the ice rather than off the ice (six percent better than average).
These trends extend to the penalty kill and power play as well. HockeyViz had Stephenson responsible for a five percentage-point reduction in power-play shot quality and three percentage-point increase in penalty-kill shot quality against.
While the 2023-24 season was a nadir for Stephenson, his previous seasons in Vegas were directionally similar. Overall, Stephenson has not been able to translate his skills into successful on-ice shot quality results when divorced from hyper-talented teammates like Stone.
The Stephenson contract is a risky bet
If Stephenson’s on-ice impacts are troubling at age 30, and his overall offensive impacts are similar to Wennberg–who signed a two-year, $10 million contract with San Jose this offseason–one may doubt the value of Seattle’s seven-year, $43.75 million investment. I assembled a list of all contracts signed in the last 10 years by a forward aged 29 years old to 31 years old with a contract term of six years or longer, and an AAV of between 6.1 and 8.1 percent of the salary cap in the first year of the contract. This exercise returned 11 total results, including Stephenson’s deal:
At the time of signing, these players had averaged .59 points per game. Stephenson trails that average only slightly, averaging .55 points per game for his career. However, that figure masks significant underlying weakness in Stephenson’s profile.
No player on the list had fewer goals scored per game played than Stephenson’s .18. No player had fewer shots on goal per 60 minutes than Stephenson’s 4.3–indeed, no other player was below 6.4. And no player in the grouping generated a higher percentage of his points via secondary assists than Stephenson (31 percent).
Perhaps most concerning of all, no player with a comparable contract had generated lower shot quality per 60 minutes than Stephenson’s .61 expected goals per 60 minutes. Tom Wilson was next lowest at .78 expected goals per 60 minutes when he signed his deal last offseason.
Based on how players age, we know that a long-term contract for a player over 30 is unlikely to be a good one. Yet, even when compared against this risky peer group, Stephenson’s contract may be a reach.
The Kraken are gambling their short-term competitive window on Stephenson
Entering the offseason, Kraken fans and media were rightly focused on acquiring a top-end offensive talent, perhaps via a prospect trade. Instead, the team signed Stephenson, an upgrade on Wennberg in the same role, but as we see here, only a marginal upgrade.
Like Wennberg, Stephenson is capable of taking tough assignments and may very well help Beniers and Wright succeed. But also like Wennberg, Stephenson is unlikely to flip his difficult minutes significantly to Seattle’s advantage. By acquiring Stephenson, the team avoided a step back, certainly. But the Kraken also committed its available short-term cap space without taking a huge leap with its forward corps.
The Kraken are gambling that they can get production out of Stephenson that hasn’t been there in the previous 10 years of his career. The Kraken may very well be proven correct; their scouting assessments have been at least solid previously. But it’s a long-shot gamble that will likely determine the team’s short-term competitive prospects.
* * *
Your turn. Dig into our Chandler Stephenson All Shifts videos over on the DeepSeaHockey YouTube Channel and let us know what you see in the comments below or on X/Twitter @deepseahockey or @sound_hockey.
Curtis Isacke
Curtis is a Sound Of Hockey contributor and member of the Kraken press corps. Curtis is an attorney by day, and he has read the NHL collective bargaining agreement and bylaws so you don’t have to. He can be found analyzing the Kraken, NHL Draft, and other hockey topics on Twitter and Bluesky @deepseahockey.
Oy. Thanks for explaining in much more (well-explained) detail what literally every smart person in the hockey world outside Seattle has been saying — that this was a colossally stupid contract, probably the worst of the summer. Yeah maybe the Kraken see something no one else has seen? But it smells like desperation. It seems like this: They are hemorrhaging season ticket holders, were ordered to improve fast before the Sonics arrive, so they bound and gagged their analytics department and signed the most OK center that was willing to come here for whatever it took. Hopefully we can enjoy a few more wins at CPA this year than last year. Hey, maybe even one on a Saturday when the place might be full. But this offseason has really destroyed the feeling most of us previously had that the team had a long-term, analytically-minded plan and was building up to something truly great. It is a weird conflicted feeling right now — in the short term, I’m excited just to watch live hockey again and I think we will see some more wins with a legitimate shot at a few playoff games. And I am NOT one of those people who thinks either you have a strong chance to win the Cup, or the entire season is a waste of time. But for the long term, they now feel, almost deliberately, to be a “mushy middle forever” team. Off-brand Minnesota Wild. The Mariners, Hockey Edition. It’s deflating.
Well said. It’s definitely the thinking (or lack thereof) behind the signing that really bugs me the most.
The one reassuring thing is that the cap should be going up pretty significantly over the life of the contract, so percentage-wise, it’ll be less and less of an albatross. Of course, this will probably be offset by a significant decline in his production as he advances in his 30s, so it’ll even out to just a really bad contract for 5+ years.
I still don’t understand how there’s a Foist and a Boist, and they’re different people. Thank you to Curtis for giving us the full picture on Stephenson, as much as it might hurt. It’s refreshing to hear some objectivity that’s not just the biased Kraken camp PR. Sound of Hockey is doing a public service. Thank you.
It’s quite simple and not a coincidence. We are brothers, nicknamed long ago by a third brother (who does not follow hockey). We could have proven our physical reality and separateness by coming to SOH Fest, but alas neither of us could make it. On the other hand, John Barr’s comment that Grubauer has a “higher floor” than Daccord, only 2+ years after Grubauer turned in one of the absolute worst goalie seasons of the entire Cap Era, would have so enraged both of us that perhaps it is best we missed it.
kidding of course. I would have LOVED to be there and can easily handle John’s Grubauer apologia. Not so sure about Boist though.
He said that??? That is literally insane. I love this site — the content, the podcast (sorry I’m behind a couple episodes clearly), the writers, the whole deal. But some of the goalie opinions here make ZERO sense to me. It’s like watching 3 years of Grubauer has totally warped people’s perception and expectation of goaltending.
Even if we discount his historically bad first season, Grubauer’s first half last year was way, way worse than Daccord’s second half. And of course, his second half wasn’t nearly as good as when Daccord basically dragged this mediocre team kicking and screaming into the wild card race into January. So, Grubauer’s floor was lower AND his ceiling was lower just last year!
Could Daccord flame out and be an .880 goaltender? Sure, maybe, but Grubauer has shown recently that he’s very capable of that same level of futility. On the other hand, Grubauer has never shown the ability to actually carry this team. He’s had one good playoff series in three years, and that’s about it. He would be a perfectly serviceable backup on close to a league minimum salary, and that’s all the praise he deserves at this point.
I tend to agree, grubs shouldn’t be our number one goaltender but he has the contract for it. SOH hasn’t really talked about the implications of buying it out next season when daccord needs a new one, but I imagine this conversation will happen at some point.
What I’d like to hear is some discussion of gmrf’s track record with setting up goalie development staff and pipelines. Clearly he failed at this in Carolina, and it appears he’s not doing well on this in seattle now. Why? What makes him different from, say, Vancouver (Luongo, markstrom , demko)? Or Nashville (Rinne, Saros)?
Curtis, I believe last season was a significant drop off for Stephenson analytically. I also know Vegas got off to a “red hot” start and then struggled to make the playoffs. Chandler was in a blender last season only logging 100+ minutes (128) on the same line with Cotter and Stone. Do you think a more consistent arrangement could help with a return to form? I think if the Kraken could get something close to the Golden Knights Cup winning Chandler Stephenson there wouldn’t be so much hand wringing.
Yeah, the numbers do look pretty bad, but I know of one number for Stephenson that may make folks feel better about the other numbers. That number is 209–his playing weight in pounds. Chandler Stephenson will be the biggest center who has ever played for the Kraken unless you count John Hayden who, if I remember correctly, got called up to play wing. …Wait, what did Shane Wright weigh in at for this year’s rookie camp?
192
Dang, I was hoping that he would weigh in over 200. He is still growing, though.
A spot-on albeit completely depressing analysis by Foist and others above. It’s a shame really, In year two the Kraken looked like a dynamic, smart organization that would capture the city’s imagination, now they look dull, listless and consigned to mediocrity for the imaginable future.
With the Sonics on the horizon I fear for the viability of the Kraken franchise going forward. It’s rumored that the NBA’s expansion fee be $4-$5bn. With David Bonderman’s net worth currently ~ $6.4bn, there is no way that DB and Jerry Bruckheimer are going to spend 60-70 percent of their net worth on the new Sonics – they’ll need another whale to pull this off. Which mean’s the ownership interests of the Sonics/Kraken will not be aligned as DB/JB will have to entice any additional Sonics partner any way they can. So look for the Kraken to be treated as second-class citizens at CPA going forward, i.e. being relegated to the unattractive Friday night/Sunday matinee dates, etc. Given the NBA’s/Sonics ginormous revenue stream relative to hockey, the Kraken’s ownership group may not be as committed to the team going forward; the Seattle Mariners comparison is odious but could easily come to fruition. Followed by average attendance of 8-9 thousand per game, operating losses and disinvestment/disinterest in the Kraken franchise going forward.
The Seattle Totems were my childhood crush and it was painful to see the team fold. If the above scenario comes to pass (it’s not far-fetched) I’d much rather the team end up where they’ll be genuinely wanted (Ottawa City?) rather than subsist as an irrelevant afterthought in a city that doesn’t care. I can get by supporting the Seattle Thunderbirds going forward…
Quite possibly the most pessimistic comment I have ever read about the Kraken. Are you from Montreal?
Whoa you went way farther than I down Sadness Road. Even if they end up playing 2nd fiddle somewhat to the sonics, they will still make enough money to spend to the cap. They’re not Ottawa. Heck even Ottawa is spending to the cap nowadays. It will cut into the owners profits but shouldn’t impact the quality of the team. The Stephenson contract represents the opposite problem — they are throwing *too much* money at a band aid solution to try and rush the team’s improvement.
@Foist – Yes understood regarding spending. But will they spend to the cap if they’re only drawing 10,000-11,000 per game?
You lost me at “the deal has the potential to be an anchor almost immediately.”
Stephenson just turned 30.
The Kraken only have FIVE forwards signed into the 26-27 season.
I have the feeling none of the people posting here have never sat in a hockey locker room. The Stephenson Montour combo is a huge add to the organization, period. Matty, Shane, Canner, Bjorkstand, Burakovsky, Tolvi and even Kartye are going to be scoring the goals.
* have ever sat…
Hey Foist, Boist, Hoist – it’s me, Loist. I just came in to echo Foist’s great message. The Stephenson signing is a bad deal and I don’t believe he has sneaky skills. That contract amount is going to be a millstone when we are trying to sign Wright, Catton, and Rehkpof to long term deals in a couple years. Great job on the article as always Curtis.
It’s a 500k overpay from the big board estimates who had him as a top forward in the pool. Y’all acting like he’s a min salary player. You also seem to forget by the time all those players you listed need contracts in THREE TO FOUR YEARS, this contract will be a big nothing burger and be no different than wennbergs when he left.
Wennberg being resigned would have been worse. Heck, Eberle being resigned is worse. The deal won’t age well but he can be useful for 4 of those years as he drifts down the lineup and does the dirty work for Wright and Beniers. If they don’t develop then Stephenson’s contract will be the least of the Kraken’s worries
I’ll pose this question to the author. If Stephenson is such a bad player, why was he one of the top forwards on the big board and projected at a contract of around 5.5 million? That alone would make me question if I was missing something when writing this article.
The annual $$ is over the projection, but that pales in comparison to the real problem — the length. I would’ve been fine with $5.5 for 5, I would’ve grumbled but been okay with $6.25 for 5 years, but $6.25 for 7?? Again, this contract was immediately panned by everybody — not just analytics people, but anybody who knows anything about hockey.
Also, excellent article Curtis!!
I could care less about the 7th year and lol that you think he would have taken 5. That last year is easy to swallow as it’ll be traceable by then if he’s isn’t already on LTIR. Kraken had to do something to get FAs. People seem to forget we’re not exactly a hot FA destination yet.
As Elliott Friedman says, “it’s not the contract, it’s the player”. If Stephenson could have been signed for 5 x 5.5, I’m sure Francis would have done it. Again…someone show me where all the elite scoring forwards in their prime are sitting around waiting for Seattle to sign them. You’re living a fantasy.
Bad contract. Unless of course your more interested in putting a slightly better product on the ice for a year or two at the cost of a bad contract on the books for about 4 years.
Thank you to everyone who took the time to read and engage with this. I continue to be blown away that people are not only interested in these types of things but also discuss here or on social media with thoughts equally, if not more, insightful.
I know this won’t go down as the most beloved piece in SOH history. But I can assure you I (and we) only write things when we both believe them and feel like there’s a place for it in the conversation. We don’t write for any other reason. Sure, there are always different ways to look at an issue or additional work that can be done. But we do our best to be informed and give you our genuine views. And, happily, I know most everyone here does the same. I know the conversation has sparked continued reflection for me.
I’m not sure I agree with the conclusion “the Kraken are gambling that they can get production out of Stephenson that hasn’t been there in the previous 10 years of his career.” The article starts out highlighting the positive impacts he provides outside of scoring and later mentions the help he may provide Beniers and Wright by taking the tough assignments they would otherwise get. Taking heat off the young centers is exactly why Elliotte Friedman recently said he was brought in, not for his goal scoring. On his defensive liability – I’d be curious to see the heat maps from before last season. His defensive metrics fell off a cliff last season, but I’m not convinced that wasn’t circumstantial. Historically, I believe he’s been much better than the article might have one believe.
After listening to this week’s podcast, I found the idea of “simply standing pat” highly unsatisfying. They didn’t have to sign Stephenson, but any realistic alternative would have done nothing to bolster the development of their two most valuable young players – Beniers and Wright. Simply moving McCann to center would be, I believe, a mistake. His talent is best served as a scoring winger rather than fulfilling – or not fulfilling – center responsibilities. For all that Wennberg brought to the team, it obviously wasn’t enough to shelter Beniers in the least. To me it seems like Ron Francis recognizes the development of his young centers will be hobbled unless they have some immediate help and waiting for “just the right deal” isn’t a sound strategy.
Go Kraken!!!