As Darren Brown explained in our introduction to the offseason, the Seattle Kraken face weighty questions this offseason.

What are the goals for on-ice competitiveness? How does the organization improve its execution once goals are selected? How can the team composition be changed to conform to the team’s goals? How are on-ice performance deficiencies addressed? How does the organization repair trust with the fanbase?

Decisions made on these and other issues this offseason will have significant consequences years into the future.

The Kraken approach the offseason with the assets to make changes

The Seattle Kraken enter the offseason with significant assets. When accounting for likely minor restricted free-agent deals, we can project the team with $76 million of 2026-27 commitments under the 2026-27 salary cap of $104 million. This leaves the team with $28 million in cap space despite relatively few glaring open roster spots.

Even beyond money, the Kraken’s asset stock is robust. (That is not to say those assets might not have been greater had the team charted a different path over the last 12 months, it’s just an existing fact.) The team has three picks in the top 40 of the 2026 NHL Draft and a top-10 prospect pool according to most analysts.

Seattle also has prime-aged, above-average veterans on reasonable, expiring contracts that would appeal to contending teams if made available. Vince Dunn and Jared McCann are the two names that come to mind first and foremost.

Seattle Kraken offseason objectives

From my vantage, the team’s offseason focus should not be on improving (or tanking) the total talent level of the 2026-27 roster—or at least that should not be the primary objective. Ideally, the Kraken would be guided by these five objectives instead:

1. Leverage lessons learned to implement front office improvements
2. Target external young talent in trades matching the core timeline
3. Create lineup opportunities for internal young talent, fostering competition
4. Maintain baseline competitiveness to foster culture, development, and medium-term success
5. Hold key draft and prospect assets unless inconsistent with the above

Let’s dig into each of these areas. I’ll also sprinkle in a few hypothetical offseason changes, trades, or signings that would, in my view, be indicative of a reasoned and successful offseason.

#1: Leverage lessons learned to implement front office improvements

The first and most essential building block of a successful offseason is the recognition of areas for improvement internally, from the top down. The organization needs to leverage lessons learned during the Ron Francis leadership era and incorporate new strategies and solutions from the team’s postseason review processes.

From the outside, we cannot speak with any authority regarding most deficiencies that may or may not exist within the organization or staffing of the front office.

That said, one evident priority is to identify the on-ice objective—the “direction,” so to speak—and then clearly communicate the objective within the office walls at Kraken Community Iceplex. The team has said as much. In highlighting areas of adjustment within the front office, Kraken general manager Jason Botterill said at his postseason press availability that “the way I operate with my staff is direct communication.” The Kraken will have “clear goals” going forward, Botterill said.

From there, the focus shifts to identifying and acquiring the core group of players necessary to achieve the objectives. That’s easier said than done, of course, but the team won’t have a chance without getting this first step right.

#2: Target external young talent in trades matching the core timeline

Put succinctly, my central offseason objective would be to refresh the forward and defense groups by adding at least one external young player to each group who fits a late-2020s window and brings more aging-curve and development upside to the core.

I considered at least three factors in settling on this core goal.

First was a clear-eyed assessment of the overall quality of the roster. From (good-natured, hopefully) jeers at Sound Of Hockey Fest before last season through an unpopular Olympic break prediction, I never viewed last year’s collection of talent as playoff caliber. A simple turn of the calendar is unlikely to change that fact because the roster remains, on balance, on the backside of the aging curve.

Second, I had to recognize that—despite its overall flaws—the roster does have a few young players who project as pieces of a winning core. These are players who should be strong performers and lynchpins of the team’s relationship with its fans. Matty Beniers tops the list. He may never be a point-per-game player, but he is a top-six center who can be trusted in all situations. Joey Daccord, while not immune from goalie inconsistencies, has shown over two seasons that he can be a 1A goaltender. Berkly Catton has shown that he has the makings of an on-ice playmaker and off-ice leader.

Equally important, there is a wave of younger players projected to arrive within a two-to-three-year time horizon, including Jake O’Brien, Julius Miettinen, Jani Nyman, Oscar Fisker Mølgaard, Jagger Firkus, Ty Nelson, and Tyson Jugnauth. Not all will work out, but each could realistically contribute to varying degrees.

This suggests the ideal contention window for the team’s existing organizational players opens in the late 2020s. An all-out sale and rebuild—the course seemingly favored by some of the more disenchanted in the fanbase—would scuttle any prospect of leveraging this window.

Third, I reached a grim conclusion when evaluating the options for immediate star-level talent acquisition (and acceleration of the team’s timeline). No doubt, the Kraken have the money to pay a star salary. The problem is unrestricted free agency does not contain such a player.

The player at the top of the market, Alex Tuch, is more like a solid first-liner. Tuch may fit the team’s need for an interior scorer who is hard to play against. I’ve long been a fan of his and mentioned him often as a Kraken trade target last offseason. But he falls well short of the threshold this team needs to reform its current trajectory, and he is likely already in his decline phase.

Assuming Tuch actually comes available, is there a version of this offseason where signing Tuch makes sense? Perhaps, but building around a free-agent acquisition is not the best approach to this offseason given the state of the team.

Now, it is possible that a prime-aged player like Jordan Kyrou could be had in a trade. I’m skeptical, however, that leveraging future assets to make a Kyrou-level addition to the existing veteran core would yield the desired results. You’d improve your near-term playoff prospects but may dim the contention window in the late 2020s and beyond in the process.

There are players who fall into a different category though. Should Jason Robertson be available in trade talks, I would consider it. Timeline acceleration becomes a more realistic conversation when you’re talking about a top-20 forward in the league. Likewise, should any of the first-line centers who have been discussed as trade targets (Auston Matthews, Robert Thomas, and Nico Hischier) be available, they would also make me pause and consider pivoting strategies.

That said, it strikes me that these are still ill-fitting solutions to the problems this organization faces. Of course, I would want to understand the availability and cost of any of the prime-aged star players. In the abstract, though, pre-prime players (24 years old or younger) who can grow with the current young group are better fits in my view.

On the forward side, Mason McTavish is one of my favorite trade targets. He is far from a perfect player, but McTavish plays a power-forward style that would be a welcome complement to Seattle’s top six. Anaheim faces an offseason where it should ideally sign Leo Carlsson and Cutter Gauthier to large, eight-year extensions. Add in five other forward contracts at or above $6.25 million AAV, and the Ducks are over-indexed on forward contracts. Since McTavish is an uncertain fit with the Ducks coaching staff (he was scratched at times), he could be an ascending player available for a palatable price. His deal has five years remaining at $7 million AAV, which would be no problem for Seattle with its cap status.

Elsewhere, could rumored deadline target Mackie Samoskevich be acquired in a deal built around a win-now piece for Florida, such as McCann? Matvei Mitchkov doesn’t check many of the boxes the Kraken need except for the most important one, generating offense; could Philadelphia be induced to move off him? What’s Cole Perfetti’s availability in Winnipeg? Could William Eklund be acquired from San Jose for a defenseman like Dunn now that the Sharks could land Ivar Stenberg at No. 2 overall in the draft? Taking a half step down, could forwards like Bradley Nadeau or Mavrik Bourque be crowded out of their team’s plans or cap structures? The list goes on.

On the blue line, I’d be inclined to make a strong offer to Buffalo for left defenseman Owen Power. If the Sabres are going to bring back free agent (and local boy) Tuch, they need to free up salary cap space, and the Sabres may be a bit over-indexed with talent on the back end. Power fits Seattle’s need for youth on the blue line, defensive production, and penalty-killing ability. He could form a capable top pair with Brandon Montour in the near term while Larsson moves into more of a second-pair workload. The cost would likely be steep, requiring multiple premium draft picks, a roster player like Ryker Evans, and a prospect. But acquiring an ascending, potential No. 1 defenseman would be worth it.

Otherwise, could the Kraken acquire Jordan Spence from Ottawa in a package built around McCann, a scoring forward who could help the Senators now? Would Anaheim part with Olen Zellweger or Pavel Mintyukov as an alternative path to breaking its logjam of young roster talent? What’s Simon Nemec’s current standing in New Jersey? (I’d ask even though I’m not as high on Nemec these days.)

These are the types of moves I’d be pursuing. If the Kraken acquired McTavish and Power in offseason trades, for example, they might not be better in the standings next season. But the vision for late-2020s competitiveness would be much clearer. This would be a win.

#3: Create lineup opportunities for internal young talent, fostering competition

On the internal development front, my goal would be to preserve NHL lineup opportunities for at least one more young player beyond those who have already established themselves. This could be a third-pair defense role, but for the forwards, ideally it would be in the top nine.

The Kraken have flexible pieces up front, including Freddy Gaudreau and Ryan Winterton, and on defense, including Josh Mahura and Cale Fleury, who can move in and out of the lineup if young players don’t step up. This should give the team comfort in taking the “risk” of leaving roles available for camp competition.

From my vantage, this is important for internal culture and development as the team’s prospects begin to knock on the door. Could we see a third-line wing spot that cycles through a dozen games each from Jani Nyman, Oscar Fisker Mølgaard, and Jagger Firkus over the first half of the season? Could the Kraken cycle a veteran and Ty Nelson, or perhaps Ville Ottavainen, through a third-pair right-shot defense role early in the season? I’d like to see that start to happen.

This means refraining from significant additions in free agency that would block these opportunities. I would be interested in a reunion with Bobby McMann. It would help with the next priority listed here. Such a move would need to be paired with the departure of one or more veteran forwards, however, to promote this objective.

Could McCann be traded to a team like the Detroit Red Wings for a player on the verge that would factor into this mix (Michael Brandsegg-Nygård) or another strong up-and-comer to add to the Coachella Valley roster (Carter Bear)? Kaapo Kakko is the other possibility.

#4: Maintain baseline competitiveness to foster culture, development, and medium-term success

Returning to a point highlighted above, I’d look to avoid taking a significant step back in overall competitiveness in the forthcoming season. This matters to the team’s internal culture. Once an organization grows comfortable with losing, that mindset can be hard to shake. It is also important to the development of the young players. Centers like Matty Beniers and Shane Wright benefit in their own progress from playing with skilled players who can think and skate with them.

A competitive roster also helps Seattle in the perception battle. A long drought would injure the team’s relationship with its fanbase and also its reputation around the league for future free agents.

Most importantly, though, preserving a baseline of competitiveness is essential to the team’s overall timeline to true contention.

Enhanced visual for qualifying for the Stanley Cup playoffs. Thanks to @SasquatchNHL for suggestion to indicate Stanley Cup Champs. pic.twitter.com/KUmXqnlnmL

— NHLtoSeattle (@NHLtoSeattle) April 8, 2026

John Barr has shown that true rebuilds take longer than you might think. If the team is stripping away mid-tier players like Wright, Kakko, or Evans for futures returns alone, those steps would actively harm, not help, the team’s competitive prospects in the rest of the 2020s.

#5: Hold key draft and prospect assets where possible

The final objective is a simple one: hold the assets that could actually make you a legitimate playoff contender in the late 2020s. By focusing on additions below the star tier, the Kraken should be able to keep their own first-round picks in the coming drafts, while still keeping Tampa Bay’s first-rounders in play. The team would also be able to hold onto young players like Berkly Catton, Jake O’Brien, Julius Miettinen, and Oscar Fisker Mølgaard.

If a game-changing acquisition is on the table, this priority could go by the wayside. Ideally, the Kraken would add young, external talent to their existing pool with the goal of peaking in two to three years.

* * *

What do you think the team’s priorities and best targets should be? Let us know in the comments below.