Kraken Mailbag – McMann contract, playoff outlook, and much more

From the friendly skies, hello and welcome to a WRITTEN version of the Sound Of Hockey Patreon Mailbag. I’m en route to South Florida, where I’ll catch up with the embattled Seattle Kraken for the next two contests against the Florida Panthers on Tuesday and the Tampa Bay Lightning on Thursday, games from which they desperately need to pick up some standings points.

Last week, we recorded our monthly Patreon Mailbag podcast episode, delivered as one of the benefits of being a Sound Of Hockey Patreon subscriber. We answered the below questions and many more, but those verbal answers are typically off the cuff and intentionally lead to debate between myself and my co-hosts, John Barr and Curtis Isacke.

We always get great questions from our Patreon subscribers, but after spending some time thinking about some of these questions, I wanted to put more thoughtful responses down on paper. I’m offering this written version up to all Sound Of Hockey readers in the hopes that a few more of you may be inclined to join our Patreon community by clicking here.

Either way, enjoy!

John O. – “If you could lock up Bobby McMann before July 1, how much money and term do you think would do the trick, and how much would be too much?”

The Bobby McMann contract situation is such a fascinating one. Despite being 29 years old, he’s really only been a full-time NHLer for the last two seasons, and he’s scored 43 goals in that time, plus 15 more as a part-timer in 2023-24.

With that lack of experience comes a current contract that pays him just $1.35 million AAV. Also bearing in mind that this could be the only time McMann can really cash in on the open market, his salary is set to skyrocket on his next deal.

Will that next deal come in Seattle or elsewhere? How much will it take for the Kraken to keep him around and forgo his one chance in his prime years to hit unrestricted free agency? Is he viewed as a player who will consistently rack up 25-ish goals, now that he’s completed his long and winding journey to the NHL?

My guess is that if he continues producing, even sporadically, the rest of the season, the Kraken will want him back, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they feel the need to go north of $5 million per year over, say, five years. But even then, the opportunity to choose his next playing home could prove too enticing to keep him in the Pacific Northwest. I would be hesitant to offer a player with this short of a track record anything more than the $4-5 million range, and that already feels quite rich.

One other thing to consider: McMann burst onto the scene with four goals and two assists in his first three games with the Kraken. In the two games since—at Nashville and at Columbus—he’s been held off the scoresheet. This aligns with the “streaky scorer” scouting report that we received upon his acquisition from Toronto, so it may behoove the Kraken to wait a little longer and see if he keeps piling up numbers or if his early output was just a “new team” bump.

Anna R. – “It seems like we will either barely make it or barely not make it to the playoffs. I don’t see any of our players in development as a generational talent. How can the Kraken get better if they don’t tank? Right now it seems like we will be perpetually in the middle.”

I don’t blame you for feeling this way, Anna, and I’ve also been struggling to understand the big-picture plan from the organization (you likely heard me complaining about the state of the franchise on the latest Sound Of Hockey Podcast or in this Three Takeaways).

One thing that is encouraging to me is that Seattle has successfully developed several of its players into full-time NHLers. We all would have hoped to see Shane Wright take another step this year—and I do worry that if they end up cutting bait and trading him, he’ll immediately flourish in a different system with more offensive talent around him.

But aside from Wright, Seattle also has Jacob Melanson, Jani Nyman, Ryan Winterton, and Ryker Evans on the current roster after drafting those players and bringing them up through Coachella Valley. Plus, there’s Matty Beniers and Berkly Catton, who made the jump straight to the NHL, and Joey Daccord, who one could argue was “developed” by the Kraken organization after they plucked him from Ottawa in the 2021 Expansion Draft.

So that’s roughly a third of the roster made up of young players who were either drafted and went straight to the NHL or spent time with the Firebirds before ascending. And of course, there are other young players knocking on the door, and it likely won’t be long before we see Jake O’Brien in deep sea blue.

The draft-and-develop plan takes an exceedingly long time, though, as we’re seeing. Now that those young players are starting to arrive, it’s not like they can jump in and dominate the league. We still have to wait for them to mature into veteran players, and even then, there’s no guarantee they will become core contributors.

So how does the front office speed up that process? I see just one possible route: cashing in some of the extensive draft capital the Kraken have built up from being sellers three out of their first four years and finding creative ways to land a couple of star players via trade. General manager Jason Botterill and president of hockey ops Ron Francis have implied at times that they want to make these kinds of moves and that they don’t intend to use all the draft picks they’ve obtained, but aside from a few moves for middle-of-the-pack players, they’ve never made a big swing.

If they’re serious about improving faster than just waiting on the kids to become the core of the team, this is the route they’ll need to take.

Kendall A. – “Should I get a Melanson jersey?”

That’s a fantastic question about a topic I generally enjoy and one I’ve oddly put a lot of thought into over the years: maximizing your jersey selection return on investment.

First, let me say that you can’t really go wrong with any player name/number. (I’m not a big fan of personalized ones with the fan’s name or some random saying or nickname on the back, but I know these are also popular choices, and I don’t dump on people who go this route; it’s just not my personal jam.)

As for narrowing it down and deciding which player’s jersey to buy, there are two factors that make for a “good” selection. The first is landing on a player with staying power. You can maximize your return by choosing a relatively young player you expect to stick with the team for a long time.

But I also find value in some level of obscurity—choosing a jersey that won’t show up on 1,000 of your closest friends when you attend a game. For example, we all expect Matty Beniers to stick with the team for many years, and he’s a big fan favorite. So although No. 10 is probably a safe purchase in terms of long-term relevance, you’ll be but a mere foot soldier in an army of Beniers jersey-wearers. It’s just a bit too “mainstream” for my liking.

Having said all that, although I have strong opinions about what makes a good jersey selection, I’m not a big purchaser of jerseys. I’ve only bought two players’ jerseys over my many years of hockey fandom. One was a massive hit in terms of value, and the other was Chris Driedger, purchased in advance of the Kraken’s inaugural season when I thought he’d be the “1B” goalie to Philipp Grubauer for several years (he played 29 total games for Seattle across three seasons).

The “massive hit” was a Jonas Brodin Minnesota Wild jersey that I bought during his second season in the NHL, when he was just 20 years old. In retrospect, it was a risky bet, because Brodin was so young that there was no telling at the time if he’d stick around long-term. But 12 years later, he still flies under the radar—meaning his jersey isn’t all that mainstream—and he’s still logging 20-plus minutes per night for the Wild.

Now, back to Kendall’s actual question: “Should I buy a Melanson jersey?” There’s some risk there. Melanson has mostly stuck with the NHL team this season and has been a big part of its success when Seattle has strung together wins. But he’s also been a healthy scratch at times and never plays big minutes.

If he sticks as a Kraken for at least five years, you’ve knocked it out of the park by purchasing his jersey. If he doesn’t, you’ll end up with a relic. Relics are also cool (my favorite Kraken jersey I’ve seen in the wild is a Dennis Cholowski jersey), but you have to recognize that this is a real possibility with Melanson.

If you’re comfortable accepting that risk, I say buy the jersey.

Paul W. – “Would you rather play Colorado in the first round or secure the fifth-best lottery odds in this year’s draft?”

That’s a tough call, but I’d rather play Colorado. A fifth-overall pick is great, but realistically, whoever that player ends up being is at least three or four years away from making a real impact. I’d like the Kraken to start accomplishing their stated goal of making the playoffs every year.

Plus, the Avalanche have faced such little adversity this season that you just never know what can happen.

Adam R. – “It seems like Seattle is not a desirable location for a lot of players in the league. Why? Is it just the lack of proven success? We’re a no-tax location (for now), with a state-of-the-art practice facility and a brand-new barn. Winters are pretty mild, though not sunny. What gives?”

I do think it’s a lack of success. Players are treated very well and have first-class facilities, plus an ownership group committed to spending whatever it takes to be considered a top-flight organization. But if a player has a say in where he lands and can choose between the warm, sunny weather of Dallas, Vegas, Florida, Tampa Bay, or even Carolina—five organizations that have either won recently or appear ready to win—versus a team that has so far demonstrated that it is simply waiting for its kids to become the core, why would he choose rainy Seattle?

While fans need a clear vision and direction to get on board and fill the arena, I think this is also true of players. Before they sign a five-year contract to uproot their families and move to a dreary (in the winter) and expensive city, they want to know they’ll be able to win and put up their own personal stats so they can still make good money on their next contract. The Kraken are built to be a defense-first team, and the coaches that have been hired (and fired, in Dan Bylsma’s case) reinforce this line of thinking. Big offensive numbers are hard to come by for Kraken players, aside from Year 2 when everything seemed to click under Dave Hakstol.

The Kraken don’t have a great track record of winning or allowing players to flourish offensively at this point, and that is creating a vicious cycle for them.

Connor D. – “If you had to play a round of golf using only one club, which one would you pick?”

When I read this question on the Patreon Mailbag podcast, I was wavering between a six iron and a seven iron. Now that I’ve thought about it for a few days (and I have thought about it), I’ve landed on a seven iron. I’m obviously sacrificing distance off the tee by choosing a mid-iron, but I want something with enough loft that I can still chip around the green, because I know I won’t be hitting many greens without a full complement of clubs. The seven is the longest club I’m comfortable using for chipping. Plus, I can still hit my seven about 170 yards with decent accuracy, so even on a 500-yard par five, if I hit my first two shots 170 and 170, I’m within range of the green in regulation on my third shot. A long par four will be bad news, but such is life.

So, seven iron is the play. Putting will be hard, but that would be true of any club in the bag other than the putter, and I’m not using the putter as my one club.

(From the SOH Discord) – FMammal: “I think Darren’s too depressed to make a Three Takeaways for the CBJ game.” LoveMonkey: “Do we need a wellness check for Darren?”

I do appreciate the concern. I’m fine, I just couldn’t bring myself to waste another hour or two of my beautiful Saturday writing about that miserable game after I had already invested three hours of agony into watching it.