The Kraken seem to have a way of rising to the occasion when they know they’re up against a tough opponent—and easing off when playing against squads below them in the standings. After a high-intensity, nearly perfect defensive effort to earn a 2-1 win over the high-flying Carolina Hurricanes on Monday, the Kraken let a long stretch of uninspired play sink them against the fire-selling St. Louis Blues on Wednesday.
“I don’t think it was anything they were doing,” coach Lane Lambert said when asked about his team’s struggle to hold momentum. “We just didn’t continue with our pressure. There’s no excuse for it. I don’t have an answer for you.”
After jumping out of the gates, the Kraken eased off the gas long enough to cost themselves two critical points.
Here are Three Takeaways from a killer 3-2 loss to the St. Louis Blues.
Takeaway 1: A hot start, and then a lull
For the first few minutes of the game, it looked like the Kraken might run up the score on the Blues. They immediately tilted the ice, fired five shots on Joel Hofer before St. Louis generated anything at the other end, and even scored an easy-looking goal when Jaden Schwartz cleaned up a juicy rebound off an Adam Larsson point shot just 31 seconds into the contest.
THE POWER OF THE SCHWARTZ! 🕺🚨
— Sound Of Hockey (@sound_hockey) March 5, 2026
Big, juicy rebound from Hofer, and Jaden Schwartz cleans up the rebound. Larsson picks up another assist after two last game.
1-0 #SeaKraken 31 seconds in. pic.twitter.com/2hQcA6TOU1
But after that, the momentum swung toward St. Louis. The Blues had the better of the play from about the five-minute mark of the first period through the midpoint of the second.
During that stretch, Logan Mailloux tied the game 1-1 at 6:50 of the first after a defensive breakdown (I couldn’t help notice Chandler Stephenson puck watching at the top of the crease) allowed him to wrap the puck around into an open net. St. Louis then took a 2-1 lead at 7:40 of the second on a well-executed rush finished by recent Kraken killer Dylan Holloway.
1-1. Logan Mailloux gets the rebound and wraps it around the other side.
— Sound Of Hockey (@sound_hockey) March 5, 2026
Grubauer was stuck on the other side, but he could have used a little help on the far side there. 😬 #SeaKraken pic.twitter.com/KkoB3qsRvU
Schwartz downplayed the notion that Seattle went quiet for nearly half the game.
“It was a pretty back-and-forth game. It was right there. It’s a one-goal game, so a save here, a bounce there.”
He’s not wrong—the Kraken were a bounce away from tying it. But easing off the pressure for that extended stretch ultimately did them in.
Takeaway 2: A nice pushback
To their credit, the Kraken mounted a strong pushback, particularly after falling behind by two goals in the third period.
Seattle generated sustained offensive-zone time and, on many nights, would have found the equalizer—especially during a 6-on-4 advantage in the final two minutes when they created several quality chances.
“We had good O-zone time,” Schwartz said. “We obviously could be around the net a little bit more, there’s rebounds, and their goalie played well. So we could have maybe had more traffic, but we had a good push… We had chances.”
Ultimately, though, only Dunn was able to solve Hofer, who came up with a handful of large stops down the stretch.
Takeaway 3: Robert Thomas had a nice game
The Blues appear to be firmly in sell mode with Friday’s trade deadline fast approaching. One name frequently mentioned as potentially available is Robert Thomas, and I paid close attention to him in this game to see how he might look in deep sea blue.
To be clear, I have no indication that the Kraken are actively pursuing Thomas or that he’d have interest in coming to Seattle, but he’s one of the more intriguing forwards rumored to be available.
Based on Wednesday’s showing, I can confirm that I wouldn’t mind seeing him in a Kraken sweater. The 26-year-old, 6-foot, 207-pound center had a strong game, recording an assist on Mailloux’s early goal and scoring what turned out to be the game-winner. On that play, Thomas found a soft spot in the slot, took a feed from Brayden Schenn, and ripped a shot against the grain that beat Philipp Grubauer.
Hmm. Robert Thomas would like nice in deep sea blue…
— Sound Of Hockey (@sound_hockey) March 5, 2026
3-1 St. Louis. #SeaKraken pic.twitter.com/fM5HMIA1Ao
I’ve always assumed Seattle would be more inclined to pursue a scoring winger than another center. But if a theoretical deal for Thomas involved Shane Wright heading the other way, the roster construction could make sense: Thomas and Matty Beniers as the top two centers, Chandler Stephenson as the 3C, and some combination of Freddy Gaudreau and Ben Meyers filling the 4C role.
I’m convinced that acquiring Thomas would represent a significant upgrade to the roster. I’m just not anywhere close to convinced the Kraken will actually land him.
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.
The opportunity to turn the pending UFAs into prospects or picks is just about squandered. The management of this team is, sadly, more desperate than the players. Management seems to want to just make the playoffs, irrespective of success once there. The players don’t seem that interested in shortening the off season.
What a load of tripe. The new CBA, combined with the increasing regular-season salary cap has completely changed trade dynamics.
Things are developing slowly throughout the league, buyers appear to be far less interested in rentals, and sellers are looking for a decent return on their assets.
They had a bad game. This has nothing to do with management and the trade deadline hasn’t passed. There’s bad takes and then there’s doom and gloom nonsense like your comment.
There’s zero reason to go big fish hunting this season unless they are a long term scoring improvement which really aren’t available out there at the moment. There’s zero reason to sacrifice our future for an extra playoff round too. We’re doing just fine. If you want to be doom and gloomy, you’ll find your kin on other podcasts who peddle in rage bait.
Interesting, hypothetical question.
We have 4URFA’s who could fetch us a second at least each on average, I would argue possibly a little more.
I completely understand management’s position trying to win games to sell seats but realistically speaking we are talking about what 20 games and then a free walk. I don’t feel like the front office is putting us in a position to succeed. You have to commit to these guys and lock them up for new contracts or get assets now for them. We’re not going anywhere except possibly a first round exit if we even make the playoffs. We are clearly is a sell position without contract extensions in place.
So what would you do if you were the GM, would you play it safe and get assets we need long term or try and win three to four more games and let assets walk?
The opportunity has been there to extend these guys and we haven’t….
Based on what has been happening so far with the trades, I’m not sure that Seattle’s UFAs would get a second. Maybe Tolvanen. The teams that are buying appear to be short on draft picks and there seems to be more unloading of depth players and mid-range prospects.
I didn’t direct the question to you in particular but since you responded go ahead and answer it.
I find it very hard to believe that Schwartz and Ebs couldn’t fetch a second with salary retention. The rig I don’t know.
I feel like Schwartz should be gone regardless just for clearing out too many mid tier players and creating a little roster space. We seriously can’t be thinking of extending him past this season, he’s exactly the kind of player we need to upgrade. Proven very clearly during his absence that we do just fine without him.
You let these guys stay just to get a few more wins?
1. This feels like a very ahistorical take on Jaden Schwartz’s impact on this team.
2. You’ve framed the question “let these guys walk to get a few more wins” which is very disingenuous, because getting a few more wins in this context means making the playoffs, where literally anything can happen.
3. Seattle doesn’t need a bunch of seconds, they need a superstar.
4. It’s been reported that they are working on extensions with their UFA’s, and historically these are things that get done right before the deadline, because deadlines motivate both sides to execute.
5. It’s clear from how you are framing these questions that you are operating from the assumption that they will not make the playoffs, which is fine, but over the history of the NHL how many teams in a playoff spot at the deadline have willingly chose to be sellers?
No they could absolutely make the playoffs I’d say it’s basically a coin toss, Gru looks like he is cooling off a little but Daccord is Daccord. It will come down to goaltending because that’s basically the only way we can win.
I don’t think it matters if we make the playoffs in terms of being sellers or buyers. Sure anything can happen but let’s be realistic, anything isn’t happening we’re not up to the caliber we need to be to make a playoff run.
A smart future focused perspective is critical at the point we are at. Draft picks always matter especially if they are first or second round picks, they have the potential to turn into something valuable long term and mean a lot more than a few more wins this season.
I’m pretty confident that we are not going to sell any players at the deadline and we shall see the competence of our front office when free agency kicks in. It will be an interesting conversation if we are forced to just let players walk after not making the playoffs or an early first round exit. Will we think it was worth it then?
Is there some looming UFA signing deadline no one else is aware of? How are they letting guys walk, exactly?
All this talk of trading players for assets…so you can get players. I know it’s difficult these days, but let’s at least make an attempt to make sense.
1) One or all of Eberle, Schwartz and Tolvanen will be re-signed.
2) The young players, like Beniers, Catton, Wright (who has looked terrible since the break), Evans, Winterton and Melanson HAVE to continue their development, and their positions need to challenged by other young prospects, like Miettinen, O’Brien and Villeneuve. That’s just how it works. No one is taking Shane for Robert Thomas.
3) Oleksiak had a great game against Carolina, but he just showed he can’t keep that kind of intensity and level-headedness up. He is the player that will for sure be going. He will not will be resigned and he will be replaced by acquiring a new LHD after the playoffs. We don’t “lose” anything because we have plenty of “assets.” In fact, we gain his $4.6m salary.
The players who actually seem to determine whether we win or lose most games are Dunn, McCann, Montour, Larsson, Oleksiak, Stephenson and Tolvanen. If those guys take the night off like they did last night, we lose. The coaches need to figure out how to make those guys accountable, because you can’t trade the whole F’ing team for “assets”. Then you don’t have a team.
Well kinda, tomorrow is pretty much the last day to get any value for a URFA. Yes you can trade before free agency opens up but the value is significantly lower and probably non existent for a player like Schwartz. Think how nice he’d fit into a contender that is top heavy and could use some improvement to their third line.
Yes I agree with you that one or maybe even two of those guys will get resigned. Why not take a second round pick for the others and roll the dice on potentially getting a stud in the draft. The upside of keeping them just isn’t there and seems shortsighted.
We’ve got guys on the farm that could do just fine filling in a hole were not taking about selling the whole team. It’s just are we seriously in a position to be deadline buyers and the front office seems to be indicating? We’re nowhere close to that, give it another two to three years if they don’t screw it up before then.
There is absolutely no reason to rush this team build, it’s not like we have some window that’s closing and we want to squeeze a cup out of an aging lineup.
You’re not trading all those RFAs and the deadline has come and gone now so we have the benefit of hindsight telling you that you’re asking prices were way off. At best our guys were seconds. Draft picks do us no good. We need top end players and they weren’t available this deadline (which has been obvious for a while now). So if I was the GM I’d do exactly what I did. Try to be opportunistic with additions and don’t screw the team with a short sighted prospect trade.
If the win against Carolina was a “signature win,” does that make this a “signature loss?”
Both games were tossups and it came down to the goalies. We got the expected 2/4 points. Doesn’t matter which game was a win and which was a loss.
I’m with Darren, they looked sluggish and disconnected for much of that game. They had a long stretch (30 min?) when they couldn’t complete a pass, or were trying to pass through multiple Blues players, or were dumping to nobody and turning it over instead of circling it back into the D zone with possession. It just looks like many of these players lack offensive instinct — they don’t consistently pass to the right areas, or aren’t anticipating passes, or don’t know where the other players are going to be at any particular time, or hold on to the puck for a second too long before shooting, or pass it when they have an open lane to shoot (especially since it looked like Hofer was serving up juicy rebounds all game). It’s been said they need a playmaker, but I think they need 2-3, and there’s no way they’ll get that many at the deadline. So they’ll likely continue to get outplayed by most teams in the league, and occasionally rattle off some wins because of their goaltending. It’s not pretty, but I guess it works, sometimes.
Also their fall in PP% is I think directly correlated to playing with a total lack of urgency. They’ll stand around for 10 seconds at a time at 5 on 4, then try a cross seam pass through 2 players that doesn’t even result in a shot. There’s very little movement of both the players and the puck. They were all bad on the PP, but Stephenson particularly stood out as having absolutely zero urgency to score. Overall that was a very frustrating game to attend.
It’s almost like they are being coached into playing a boring no energy uneventful game in the hopes they get better goaltending to win?
I mean maybe 🤔
This is my concern, that even if they get a Robert Thomas type, he’ll go from a point per game player to 0.5 points per game.
That’s probably Robert Thomas’ concern as well LOL.
Yes, Stephenson was particularly bad, even by his low standards. A 18% xGF% at even strength!! His line got severely caved in. The rest of the forwards did pretty well. I know some people are sick of hearing about how bad Stephenson is. Well I’m sick of watching him. Oh, but his usage? His O-zone start percentage was 80% at even strength, 83% overall. They gave him a few key faceoffs in the O zone when they were trying to come back, and he lost those faceoffs.
And then on D, the clear culprits were the Lindgren and Evans pairing — both at 15% xGF%. Lindgren in particular looked like he could barely move. Was he not actually ready to come back? Why rush him? He is not much better (perhaps not at all better) than Cale Fleury or Josh Mahura, anyway.
And Grubauer totally glitched on that first goal that kicked off the sluggish stretch. How was he that slow to get over on that wraparound? Are we back to the bad old days where Grubauer just lets in one back-breaker every game?
Yes it was just one game, but it was a big one. Last one before the deadline against a beatable opponent that had just traded away a heart-and-soul player and their top D man. The Kraken they should have been pumped to avenge last week’s debacle, and had the chance to build a winning streak into the deadline and stretch run. I was pumped for this game, I really thought they needed to and would win. And the division is so bad that who knows? But then a chunk of the team — especially the usual culprits — failed to show up. The problems were persistent ones and connected to bad decisions by management and coaching (the signing and utilization of Stephenson and Lindgren). That is why this one particularly stung and was particularly discouraging. I’m back to thinking this team will miss the playoffs. Even with the Kings going down the drain, I think it’s more likely than not that the Sharks or Preds will catch them for that last WC spot.
I’ve been noticing that Gru is getting back to overreacting to chances and putting himself out of position. That was truly his biggest weakness during his shall we call it his underwhelming days? Early in the season he was very impressive in his positioning and wasn’t getting drawn onto his belly or completely out of the net as often.
Pretty disappointed in losing to the Blues twice in a week. Second loss without facing Team Canada’s D Parayko rubbed salt in the wound!
Like Darren, I’ve not read any evidence Seattle is in the hunt for Thomas, the $8.1M AAV center, but would love to see rumored-to-be-available Thomas land with Seattle.
An astonishing lack of consistency.
Typical for any .500 team in any sport.