I’ve been eager to dive into the Seattle Kraken scoring this season, and the 4 Nations Face-Off break provided the perfect opportunity to analyze some key metrics without the data changing every few days. In this exploration, I’ll examine a couple areas: how the Kraken rank across the NHL in scoring metrics and the factors that contribute to scoring (e.g., shots). Additionally, I’ll compare the 2024-25 Seattle Kraken to prior seasons.
Average goals scored
It’s no secret that the Kraken struggled to find the back of the net last season, ranking 29th in the league in goals for per game with just 2.61. This year, they’ve shown significant improvement, ranking 15th in the league and averaging .34 more goals per game.
There’s an important caveat: over the final month of last season, after Vince Dunn got hurt, Alex Wennberg got traded, and the Kraken dropped out of the playoff race, their scoring declined significantly, bringing their 2023-24 goals for average down for the full campaign. So, the increase in scoring this season is a little inflated. Even so, they’re currently averaging more goals per game than five teams that hold playoff spots.
Goal scoring scenarios
To further analyze the Kraken’s goal scoring, let’s examine the goal scoring scenarios over the last four seasons.
We can see improvements in even-strength scoring, particularly in 5-on-5 goals, but the numbers still fall short of the 2022-23 season, when the Kraken qualified for the playoffs as a wild-card team. One area where the team could make significant strides is in contributions from the power play.
Power-play scoring
A prime opportunity for improvement lies in the power play. The Kraken currently rank 25th in power-play conversion, with a 18.1 percent success rate. Historically, the Kraken have struggled on the power play, but this season’s 18.1 percent conversion rate is the lowest since the inaugural season’s 14.5 percent.
We’ll discuss him further shortly, but the loss of Jordan Eberle just 17 games into the season undoubtedly hindered the power play. At the time of his injury, Eberle was playing 54 percent of the Kraken’s power-play minutes.
Shot volume and quality
Another key aspect to consider when evaluating the Kraken’s goals scored per game is shot volume and quality. The team ranks 27th in shots per game, averaging 26.84 shots per contest.
To better understand the team’s shot quality, let’s break down 5-on-5 shots by high, medium, and low danger for each season.
The struggles with scoring last season were largely attributed to a lack of shots in high-danger areas, and unfortunately, that trend appears to have continued this season, with high-danger shots per game actually decreasing from last year’s numbers. Furthermore, the Kraken’s 5-on-5 medium-danger shots per game have also declined compared to last season.
Players’ scoring output
While a more in-depth analysis of individual goal scoring is needed, a preliminary look reveals which players are scoring more or less frequently over the last three seasons, as well as how their current output compares to their three-year averages.
At first glance, it’s clear that Vince Dunn, Jaden Schwartz, and Eeli Tolvanen are experiencing above-average goal production. Eberle was on pace for his best goal-scoring season ever before suffering an injury just a month into the season. Conversely, Andre Burakovsky and Jared McCann are below their three-year averages. It’s important to note that Shane Wright’s decline is likely attributed to his small sample size of just eight games in the 2023-24 season.
Further analysis is necessary, as factors like ice time and power-play time can significantly impact these numbers.
Assessment
Overall, the Kraken have increased their goal production from last season, but there’s still room for improvement. The two most significant areas for growth are power-play production and generating more high-danger shots. While these improvements are easier said than done, the loss of Eberle since mid-November and Dunn’s injury that kept him out of the lineup for 20 games has undoubtedly hurt, particularly given their contributions on the power play. Adding another goal scorer during the offseason would be ideal, but it’s not a necessity, considering several playoff-bound teams are scoring fewer goals than the Kraken this season.
This brief analysis of scoring metrics provides a general direction, but there’s certainly an opportunity to delve deeper into advanced analytics for a more comprehensive understanding.
Thanks John for revealing the numbers and your thoughtful overall analysis. Well done!
Go Kraken!!!
We had some games against lower tiered teams in which we scored a high amount of goals that throws the balance of data off. I also have a bad feeling about open net goals. According to the data, the Kraken are an average goal scoring team. Is there a way to have another goal scoring category that would put these 2 data pieces pr cjamge the calculations for these 2 categories to see where the Kraken stand league wise?
If goal scoring is happening at a decent, if uninspiring, pace, then there must be a problem with goal prevention. Daccord has performed well, so that would seem to point to defense as an issue by default before we even look at statistics. That would match the eye test as well, which I find surprising.
On paper, the Kraken defense looks outstanding. Dunn-Larsson and Oleksiak-Montour make for a defensive top-four that should be the strength of the team. Why are they not the most effective unit on the team? Is it a system issue? Is it an effort issue? Is it a focus issue? Is it that, because they find themselves behind early so often, they often need to jump into the offensive zone and leave themselves vulnerable? I would buy that.
I would say when it comes to shot volume it’s important to look at not just “shots” – which are the pucks that actually get to the net – but “shot attempts” which includes misses and blocked shots. In actual attempts the Kraken’s 57 per game actually ranks them 22nd. Consistent with shots, their high and medium danger attempts are down for the third year in a row and their low danger attempts are close to the same. What’s most shocking, however, is where these individual stats actually rank. Seattle’s 36 LDCF ranks 11th in the league but their 13.35 MDCF is dead last… which really seems a shame considering their shooting percentage on those is No.1 in the league. HDCF… 28th. And if you want to go back to “shots”, 5.48 HDSF is dead last in the league. It’s pretty easy to see why Alison pointed out SportLogic having the Kraken 30th in xGF.
The Kraken are one of only two teams in the league who have more than 63% of their shot attempts coming from the “low danger” areas but the other team, Florida, is second only to Carolina in offensive zone time… Seattle is 25th.
The problem as I see it – and what I’m actually seeing on the ice – is more about “zone time”. The Kraken are unable to gain the zone and control the puck in a sustained way. When they do manage possession they take too many low percentage shots that all too often simply result in a loss of posession. Conversely, I think one of the reasons the defense seems “so bad” is simply because they’re spending so much time in their own zone. The stats say they’re actually doing a good job of keeping shots to the outside, but the volume of time and low danger shots against is adding up to a big xGA number. Dwelling on every miscue to try and excuse Grubauer doesn’t help the perception either.
Last season Hakstol shouted out, “Shoot the f-ing puck” in practice… and the team lost 11 of it’s next 14. This season Bylsma has been talking about a “shooters mentality”. To me the problem isn’t about shooting the puck more, it’s about offensive zone posession, and paradoxically, more low percentage attempts are resulting in less attempts overall.
Just a theory…
Go Kraken!!!