Never a doubt! I never stopped believing in this Seattle Kraken team!
Well… I guess the first period Saturday made me question things a little. And the nine losses in the previous 11 games and the four-game losing streak coming into this one didn’t help.
In those opening 20 minutes Saturday, the Kraken looked like they’ve tended to look over the past month, laying a massive egg and accepting a two-goal deficit before waking up and scoring six unanswered goals for a 6-2 win over the Sabres.
“How we played in the second, how we played in the third is—yes, we got the result,” coach Dan Bylsma said. “But that’s how you have to play each and every night to try to have success.”
Kaapo Kakko scored twice, Oliver Bjorkstrand had a goal and a fight (!!), and Joey Daccord made 34 saves in his first start since Dec. 22.
It’s a small step in the right direction, but it’s nice to be writing about a victory for a change. Here are Three Takeaways from a 6-2 Kraken win over the Sabres.
Takeaway #1: An atrocious first period
You know how I said I never stopped believing in the Kraken? That may have been a fib. The team has looked shockingly bad lately, and the opening frame Saturday—in which they were outshot 15-3 before throwing a few at Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen late in the frame to close that gap—was about as bad as the Kraken have looked in an already horrendous stretch.
How they continue to come out with no energy when they recognize that they’re fighting for their lives is beyond me, but that is what has been happening. In this one, they had NOTHING going in a period that rivaled the second period of the last game against Columbus as one of the worst of the season.
By the time the horn sounded, Seattle was looking at yet another two-goal deficit thanks to a hard-luck deflection of a Sam Lafferty shot off Vince Dunn and an easy power-play tally by Jack Quinn.
“Dan obviously made it pretty clear [the first] wasn’t good enough, which I think everybody could agree with,” Bjorkstrand said. “So, we had to find another step in our game, and I think we responded well. And we’ve got to play hockey like that more often.”
The Kraken came out in the second period and looked far more engaged, riding goals from Ryker Evans and Andre Burakovsky to erase the miserable first period and set themselves up to pull away in the third.
Oh, to have been a fly on the wall between the first and second periods.
Takeaway #2: Strong individual performances
Several players stuck out in helping turn this game around. Andre Burakovsky scored a huge goal and had a few more good looks, including a nice burst of speed that led to a partial breakaway. Joey Daccord was rock solid with a .943 save percentage. Matty Beniers didn’t have a point but was plus-two and helped put the Sabres on their heels several times. Oliver Bjorkstrand had a goal and a fight (yes, a fight) against Dennis Gilbert that did seem to inject a little more life into the squad.
Bylsma specifically called out Burakovsky’s game. “I think Andre [made] a lot of strong plays. You see him skating up the ice, he’s a dangerous player, but a lot of good puck plays as well.”
And how can we forget Kaapo Kakko? The big winger has continued to impress since his pre-Christmas acquisition from the Rangers. In this game, he scored two consecutive goals, 1:40 apart in the third period. His first goal of the game was also Seattle’s second tally in 38 seconds and put the Kraken firmly in the driver’s seat for the first time in five contests.
Josh Mahura (who also had an awesome game with two assists) passed it to Kakko and then drove to the net. Kakko did the rest, rifling it over Luukkonen’s shoulder.
#SEAKRAKEN SCORE TWICE! 🚨 🚨
— Sound Of Hockey (@sound_hockey) January 11, 2025
First, Bjorkstrand gets a good bounce off Jacob Bryson. He’s an assist from a Gordie Howe hat trick.
Then Kaapo Kakko snipes one through Luukkonen.
4-2 pic.twitter.com/6chfNClLlX
Kakko followed that up with a power-play goal at 3:46 of the third after a nice forecheck by Jared McCann and Shane Wright. Wright pried the puck loose to McCann, McCann found Kakko at the bottom of the slot for one of his two assists, and in a flash, the puck was once again in the back of the Sabres’ net.
KAAPO DOES IT AGAIN! 🚨
— Sound Of Hockey (@sound_hockey) January 11, 2025
Two straight goals for Kakko, this one a PPG, and suddenly the #SeaKraken are running away with this game. 🤯
5-2. pic.twitter.com/1Uripo5M0i
Takeaway #3: Did shenanigans create the spark?
There were two moments of extracurricular activities in this game that one could point to as helping to turn the tide.
First, Oliver Bjorkstrand laid a big hit on gritty defenseman Dennis Gilbert. Gilbert went awkwardly into the boards and didn’t like it, popping up and giving Bjorkstrand no choice but to drop the gloves for the third time in his career. Bjorkstrand did well to keep Gilbert in close and protect himself from the far more experienced pugilist.
FISTICUFFS! 🥊
— Sound Of Hockey (@sound_hockey) January 11, 2025
Dennis Gilbert goes after… OLIVER BJORKSTRAND?!
Bjorkstrand does well protecting himself. #SeaKraken pic.twitter.com/XF5AVt9Nnj
“A guy like Oliver Bjorkstrand getting in a fisticuffs, he did it obviously in response to the play there, but him being physical on the wall and then responding [is big],” Bylsma said. “But I think we tiptoed into the game a little bit, and I think when you see Oliver Bjorkstrand… do the physicality and get in the fight, it jumpstarts the team a little bit.”
“I just reacted,” Bjorkstrand said. “In the moment, I felt like it. It’s just kind of pretty simple. Not much to it.”
That incident happened at 17:42 of the first period, mere seconds after Seattle had fallen behind 2-0. The Kraken had a little flurry of shots to close out the period, then came out in the second and looked completely different.
The other moment of feistiness that seemed to lift Seattle’s effort level happened when Rasmus Dahlin tried to decapitate Brandon Tanev at 5:24 of the second period. Everyone on the ice jumped in immediately, showing the kind of physical response that has lacked at times from this team in its four-year history.
Rasmus Dahlin tries to take Brandon Tanev’s head off, and all hell breaks loose.
— Sound Of Hockey (@sound_hockey) January 11, 2025
Terrible hit by Dahlin. #SeaKraken #LetsGoBuffalo pic.twitter.com/fmRIwXuXOG
After that, the game did turn on its ear, with Ryker Evans getting Seattle on the board at 12:48 of the second and Andre Burakovsky leveling the score at 19:12. Did those two moments really turn the game?
The win is just a drop in the bucket in terms of getting the Kraken back in the race, but it’s good to have a positive feeling once in a while. They face a tough test in Detroit on Sunday.
Darren Brown
Darren Brown is the Chief Content Officer at soundofhockey.com and the host of the Sound Of Hockey Podcast. He is a member of the PHWA and is also usually SOH’s Twitter intern (but please pretend you don’t know that). Follow him @DarrenFunBrown and @sound_hockey or email darren@soundofhockey.com.
Don’t let the actual score fool you… the Kraken lost this game 1.94 to 1.31.
Headline should read “Advanced Stats Ruin A Win”. Advanced stats are so worthless for hockey because there are way too many variables.
I’ve got plenty of time for “advanced analytics”, but I agree the variables are especially problematic on small samples. Also, I don’t think there is a single stat – other than final score – that can give you valid information by itself… especially stats that start with “expected”.
I agree with your final words, that being with expected. But, the final score and the W make the 2 points so I’m going with that.
Just to clarify…
My first post about the Kraken losing the game was meant to be ironic.
After the sloppy start they we’re clearly the better team and made a lot of excellent plays I thought. Joey looked good, but he also got lucky a few times.
If you just looked at xG% 5v5 – which some folks do – the Kraken came up short even though they outscored Buffalo at 5v5 4-1.
The idea of a team losing 1.94 to 1.31 is absurd… and that was the point. You’ve got to base the score on what they actually do… all of it.
I’m not sure why anyone would look at 5v5 xG for a game which had almost an entire period’s worth of penalties (9). If you include those values, the Kraken did “win” by almost a goal, Joey was above water in xG, and the Kraken overall outplayed the Sabres (57% xGF%), which all meet the eye test for the game as a whole.
I agree, the individual numbers to the decimal place have very little meaning in 1 game sample sizes, but can be meaningful in larger samples. As an example, Stephenson has an xGF% at even strength of 34%, which is DEAD LAST in the NHL out of 358 skaters who have played over 300 minutes. That is meaningful AND matches the eye test. He has been decent on the power play, but at even strength, he has been one of if not the worst play driver in the league. Woof.
Nope, they won.
Disco Dan needs to continue to learn how to inspire these guys to play hard.
I’m in Detroit for the game tomorrow. I hope they don’t have amnesia. Go Kraken!
Win or lose… have a great game!
Go Kraken!!!
Enjoy! My 1 away game of the year was Chicago….
It was terrible and they ruined my 5-0 win streak
I ended up falling sleep after the first period just opposite of the Kraken who woke up after the first period
This is a TLDR reply for Boist… I assume everyone is familiar with the oft missing reply button…
I saw that 358th number a couple of times recently. If your “eye test” is telling you Stephenson is the worst even strength forward in the NHL, I think maybe you have some blind spots. Something close to below average – or even well below average – I might not have even noticed, but the fact that it’s dead last… if you don’t ask why and just say, ‘sounds about right’… I think you’re missing something.
Two numbers jump right out at me. Of those 358 forwards, Stephenson’s 227 defensive zone faceoffs rank 13th. Combine that with an .898 SV% at 5v5 – bad enough for 28th in the league – and it starts to make sense why he’s getting “caved in”. I am not saying Chandler Stephenson is a “top tier” centerman. I do think, however, the guy is getting tough assignments – and that’s what he was brought in for. If you look at the Kraken in all situations, Beniers and Wright are taking 60% of their faceoffs in the offensive zone. Stephenson gets less than 47%. In actual numbers, Stephenson has taken 369 D zone draws – 168 more than Beniers and 249 more than Wright.
Without terrible Chandler Stephenson, who are you giving those 369 crappy assignments to? Yanni Gourde? He already gets the same treatment as Stephenson, just less of it. PLD?… retired. Lizotte and his 46.5%? That would be the worst faceoff percentage among Kraken centers. Wennberg – who didn’t want to resign with Seattle? He’s 343rd on that same list. It’s the two young guys that get to eat that turd sandwich… and to me, that sounds like a terrible way to develop those players.
Also worth noting… last season over 75 games in Vegas Stephenson took 1050 faceoffs. He’s already taken 860 with the Kraken and his 442 “wins” is 7th in the league.
Eat minutes, take faceoffs, distribute the puck… just my thoughts.
That’s actually some interesting information. Feels so much that he is a stop gap as Beniers and Wright develop.
Something else I thought was interesting…
Last July Dom Luszczyszyn of The Athletic did a breakdown of pending free agent centers and had this to say:
“The biggest reason to be a Stephenson skeptic, though, is the Mark Stone of it all. Since arriving in Vegas, the duo has shared the ice a lot — to only Stephenson’s benefit. Over the last three years, the duo has played 1,370 [5v5] minutes together, earning 57 percent of the goals and 52 percent of the expected goals. In 1,875 minutes without Stone, Stephenson is at 50 percent and 48 percent. In 496 minutes without Stephenson, Stone is at 60 percent in both goals and expected goals.”
Now of course, Mark Stone is one of the premier forwards in the entire NHL and he’s the sort of player that makes whoever skates next to him better. That said, I think there are a couple things with these numbers worth pointing out.
First, of those 496 minutes Stone played without Stephenson, 277 (56%) were with Jack Eichel.
Second… Stephenson/Stone drew in the offensive zone 54% of the time. Stephenson alone dropped to 52% while Stone alone bumped up to 55%… BUT, Stone’s draws with Eichel were taken in the offensive zone 60% of the time!
Mark Stone’s numbers improve when he plays the majority of his time next to one of the current Hart Trophy frontrunners and takes 12% more of his draws in the offensive zone. Or as Luszczyszyn puts it… his numbers go “down” when he plays with Stephenson… Weird.