The single biggest narrative surrounding the Seattle Kraken over their five seasons of existence has been consistently the lack of a true, elite superstar. They’ve had depth and at times had flashes of success, but they’ve never had that definitive game-breaker that can consistently get them that pivotal goal.
So, when the news broke last week that general manager Jason Botterill had the framework in place to acquire Dallas Stars phenom Jason Robertson, my immediate reaction was pure, unadulterated astonishment. The fact that the front office had a big enough deal lined up, reportedly involving the No. 7 overall pick of the 2026 Draft, to actually reel in a whale of that caliber? Stunning.
And then, almost instantly, the excitement curdled into a knot in my stomach.
The Kraken had taken their swing. The money was on the table: a massive, eight-year contract worth a whopping $15 million per season. The stage was set. And the star player just… looked at Seattle and said, “No thanks.”
It hurts. The Kraken finally had their definitive shot at a franchise cornerstone, and the door was slammed in their face. Making matters worse, the hockey world has been bashing Seattle in the aftermath, with the prevailing message being that nobody wants to play here. For those of us that live here, we know that shouldn’t be true, but it is the narrative right now.
Why turn down $15 million?
It’s easy to get defensive and spiral into the weeds trying to figure out why Robertson walked away from a life-altering bag of cash to play in the Pacific Northwest. Maybe he doesn’t like the city. Maybe the grueling travel schedule of the Pacific Division isn’t his jam. But if we strip away the emotion and look at it objectively, the reality is simple: the Kraken are not close to competing for a Stanley Cup right now.
Robertson turns 27 this July. In modern NHL years, that’s right when players hit a critical crossroads. They start to look at the bigger picture and realize they only have so many prime kicks at the can left to win a championship. At that age, an elite competitor wants to go somewhere that, at the very least, appears ready to contend immediately. Seattle isn’t there yet.
If there is any solace to be found in this whole saga, it arrived a day later. When reports surfaced that Robertson had also turned down a monster trade to the St. Louis Blues, it made the rejection a little easier to stomach. It wasn’t just a Seattle problem; it was a Robertson plan.
The dawning age of player empowerment
What we are witnessing right now isn’t just an isolated contract dispute; it’s the dawning age of player empowerment in the NHL. For years, hockey culture dictated that players fall in line and go where they’re told, but the tide has been turning. We are seeing a growing movement of stars utilizing their contractual leverage to dictate their own futures, forcing teams into trades of their liking, or flat-out refusing destinations they don’t want.
We saw the momentum building with the Brady Tkachuk trade and with Dylan Larkin trying to force his way out of Detroit. Even before that, the warning signs were there—think Brad Marchand steering his way to Florida or Mitch Marner putting his foot down and refusing a trade to Carolina. Robertson is just the latest superstar to realize exactly how much power he actually holds.
The “No No-Trade Clause”
By rejecting these pre-arranged sign-and-trade deals with both Seattle and St. Louis, Robertson is essentially executing a “no no-trade clause.” He doesn’t technically have a formal NTC in his contract yet, but by refusing to sign the necessary long-term extension required to facilitate these blockbuster returns, he has put the Dallas Stars in an absolute pickle.
Sure, Dallas could still theoretically trade his rights to whoever offers the highest bid. But without the guarantee of a contract extension in place for the acquiring team, the return coming back to Jim Nill is going to be substantially less. Robertson’s camp is driving massive leverage against the Stars right now, and this situation has all the ingredients to play out very, very messy in the Lone Star State.
As for the player himself? Look, I have always loved Jason Robertson’s game. And just like with other players across the league who have stood their ground, I respect guys for exercising the rights provided to them under the collective bargaining agreement. Business is business, and this doesn’t change my appreciation for what he does on the ice one bit.
Where do the Kraken go from here? To steal a line from the Wheel of Time: “We bury our dead and move on. What else is there?”
It’s that simple.
I hope “burying our dead and moving on” doesn’t involve free agency.
Go Kraken!!!
It’s funny, I usually do a piece on potential Kraken targets based on needs and availability. I just don’t see much this year with the roster pretty much filled out. They can obviously move pieces out, but I could see them staying pat and continuing to make trades.
Wait a second, are you saying you actually WANT the Kraken to sign UFAs this year? With the particularly underwhelming crop this year, and the Kraken’s disastrous record with UFA signings?
Please please no.
I’m saying just the opposite…
Ok good, whew! It was not a rhetorical question, I honestly could not tell what you were saying.
I feel better now. Thanks John. Good article!
I don’t blame Robertson for taking this route, players don’t get this opportunity very often and I feel like he deserves to not be playing for a struggling team if he doesn’t want to. I’m not even sure this is a bad thing for the kraken, a spoonful of reality might just be what the Dr ordered. We’ve got work to do, you don’t go from the least reverent team in the NHL to attracting superstars in an offseason. I don’t believe that adding Robertson would have taken us to the next level and apparently he didn’t as well.
The more news that has come out (including who his agent is), it’s clear he’s just using this as leverage against Dallas and doesn’t want to move. He’s just not willing to take less than he’s worth to do so.
It’s also clear other people didn’t read the article before commenting.
Tinfoil hat.
I’m not sure how you would come to this conclusion. It’s clear that he doesn’t want to go to Seattle or SL who isn’t in much better shape than Seattle.
It doesn’t seem a stretch in the least to consider the idea that Robertson and his agent are trying to stay in Dallas. It’s not at all difficult to see how someone comes to this conclusion, especially considering Jim Nill has said following the draft they’re still negotiating and it’s their preference to re-sign him.
I get it Nino – how you come to this – but I think even this is a bit much for you.
I live rent free in this kids head. He can’t help himself being the contrarian to any well thought out comment
To be fair I don’t think Koist presented it as a possibility or an “idea”. I also don’t see you defending me when he’s attacking me on known information.
He presented it as tinfoil hat stuff and that’s what I called it out as.
I’m not getting between you two and your thing.
I wasn’t “defending” him, I was responding to your idea that Robertson’s decision was purely motivated by not wanting to play in Seattle. This isn’t exactly what you said, but I don’t think it’s a reach for me to infer that.
I think the first ten minutes or so of today’s 32 Thoughts is worth a listen.
Lebrun, Pagnotta, Friedman and others have all reported that they think Robertson wants to stay in Dallas and is likely using it as leverage. This isn’t some opinion out of left field.
Yep. His agent was also Rantanen’s so him pulling sheniganans is not unexpected.
Let’s look at the evidence, he’s turned down two terms that aren’t good and not in a win window. He’s asking for a lot more than Dallas is willing to pay, they are not close to a deal. Everything else is purely speculation, I’m sure he would be happy going to a very good numbers of teams. Until we see him turn down a good fit I think it’s grasping.
It’s not like we’re talking about well known and documented stuff like RF drafting centers. 😂
You are the one claiming it’s “tin foil hat stuff” and have no idea where Koist is getting the idea from. I’m just pointing out that experts and analysts across the league have come to the same conclusion as Koist. It’s been all over the rumor mill, of
course nobody knows for certain.
Many of those same experts, including the ones who write for this site, also agree that the Kraken draft with a BPA philosophy 🤷♂️
Turbo did you read what he said?
“The more news that has come out (including who his agent is), it’s “CLEAR” he’s just using this as leverage against Dallas and doesn’t want to move. He’s just not willing to take less than he’s worth to do so.”
I’m just saying that it’s not clear….. tinfoil hat stuff and completely made up BS. the experts are not saying it’s clear, they are saying it’s a possibility. I would not argue with that.
Good article. What excited me is that ownership is willing to go all in – Plenty of players under longer term contracts that we should explore – challenge is they need to be under 25 to fit what will be our window when they turn 27.
PHR predicts the Kraken signing Tolvanen, Roslovic, and Evander Kane. Interesting…I don’t really see any of them, except maybe Roslovic. He has the motor this team is looking for.
I hope we don’t sign Kane, I would be very surprised given his history and that the Kraken are very PR friendly.
Beniers, Stephenson, Wright, Gaudreau, Catton, Molgaard, Meyers… and they’re bringing in Roslovic? As thin as the market is, I would assume he’ll get signed as a center and unless Seattle is moving someone out (Wright?), I just don’t see the fit.
Fair point, but geez I hope they are not trying to hold a lineup spot for Gaudreau. I forgot they still had him under contract — and for 2 more years, ugh. He was utterly unplayable last year, especially in the 2nd half. They need to treat him as a sunk cost.
McMann-Beniers-Kakko
Catton-Wright-Samoskevich
McCann-Stephenson-Eberle
Winterton-Gaudreau-ROSLOVIC?
prefer the 4th line to come equipped with either molgaard or melanson. i dont know enough about roslovic, who is he in comparison to tolvi?
Well, as much as I like Melanson, Roslovic is a big upgrade as he is an experienced NHL’er who can actually score, and I think The Kraken want to get back to rolling four dangerous lines that can all score. I also really like Molgaard, but he is still a bit green, AND with new players coming into Coachella (O’Brien? Miettinen? Villeneuve? Bernier?) you don’t want to strip all the good more experienced players away. In fact, I would love to see Melanson down in Coachella for that reason. The priority this season should be raising the levels of Matty, Shane, Berkly and Evans, and not rushing guys into the lineup. Also remember there are always injuries. I don’t know why people seem to forget that.
not forgetting there are injuries, and i know we will see some of the young guys come up here and there. the preference for melanson is mostly because he maximized his time as a wrecking ball and between him, wints and meyers it seemed like they had the most push and established a lot of offensive zone time through the forecheck. shoot it into the goalies breadbasket and get one of the top lines out in the offensive zone. i will acknowledge goal scoring should probably trump checking but at some point one leads to the other. not arguing your point just expanding on my position. and again i just have not seen enough roslovic to have an opinion on him. i can also freely admit its not the best sign that, of your hockey teams build, the 4th line seems the most effective. related/unrelated bjorkstrand is hitting the market, would it be dumb to sign him, put samoskevich on the 4th line and run bjorkstrand with catton and wright? again this will be a moment where i dont know what bjorkys advanced metrics are or if he was a problem here (when gourde, bjorkstrand and tanev left the rumors i read were that tanev was the issue)
I thought about Roslovic on the right side but I think someone will sign him to play center – which is where I think he wants to be – rather than on the wing… especially on the fourth line for a “team in transition”. I don’t know much so this isn’t worth anything but this PHR take sounds like they went, “Who will overpay…” and plugged Seattle in here – so this pretty much guarantees they’re signing him.
Except we don’t have a “fourth line”, so no worries for him there.
Also a team with McMann, McCann (assuming we don’t trade him), Stephenson, Gaudreau, Dunn, Montour and Larsson…then younger guys like Samoskevich, Kakko, Beniers, Wright, Catton and Evans…doesn’t look like a team in transition. If they sell him on rolling four lines, it probably doesn’t sound too bad.
Speaking of the right side…
Marchenko? If he wants “the bag” I believe he’s eligible for an extension Wednesday and nobody has been throwing around money like Seattle.
I would flip Wright and Stephenson there, because I liked when Catton was paired with Stephenson last season and because McCann and Eberle make Wright better. Besides, if Wright is going to get nearly all offensive zone draws again, it would make sense to have the team’s two best scoring forwards there with him. Maybe then the third line would actually be able to take advantage of some matchups against lesser competition.
No credible source is reporting any of that and in fact 2/3 of those make zero sense.
Yeah I don’t think any of us know one way or another Robertson’s motivation for rejecting the Seattle contract, or whether there is another team that he would have approved at the same price. This is not a situation where there has been reports that he has requested a trade, to a “winner” or warm-climate or close-to-home or otherwise. It’s *possible* that he really most wants to just stay in Dallas, but he thinks he’s worth more than $12M, and his agent is leaking this rejection of a $15M/year offer as leverage to get the Stars up to 13 or 14M, and then he can look like a hometown hero for taking a “cut” versus the open market.
As for Panarin, he clearly really wanted to be in LA in particular, which would not be anyone’s top destination purely based on “winner” status. He clearly liked the idea of being in LA for some reason.
Conversely, has Seattle established itself as a Destination for everyone who wants to Win? No, clearly not, but I also don’t think we can use these two rather different incidents as some kind of trend proving that the Kraken are a pariah franchise.
Either way, the best way to build a real winner is to draft and develop. Management seemed to understand that at the beginning, and then went off track two years ago when they started blaming coaches for their mediocre rosters and handing out stupid 7 year deals. Whatever Robertson’s reasons, it’s good they held on to their pick and got Chase Reid, who seems like a real stud prospect.
Friedman said today he believes the deal was three firsts and a young player. Reid would’ve been one. I’m guessing the Tampa first and a protected Seattle first were the other two. He wouldn’t say who he thought the young player was, but he did say he didn’t believe it was O’Brien. All in all, sometimes the best deal is the one that doesn’t happen. We’ll see…
Robo is flexing. It will be interesting to see how Dallas responds. They are pretty stacked for players.
Another thing worth “teasing” out…
On the PDOcast yesterday Scott Wheeler said he was sure Chase Reid was the No.1 D on Seattle’s list. I think Wheels is a “straight shooter” and I trust what he says.
If they’d gone full tank and finished dead last in the league they’d have been picking at No.3. Does Seattle try and move the No.3 pick for Robertson rather than the No.7? I don’t know. Maybe, maybe not.
Stay tuned….
The need for a scorer on this team doesn’t change at #3. The cost may just have gone down if Dallas saw something they liked up there.
This team also needs a potential legit right-shot No.1 D in it’s pipeline. If Reid was that on their list… that’s a change.
Sure at some point that’s a problem but we also need a shooter. With a player like Robertson I feel like you gotta shoot your shot.
I don’t mind that they went for, and I don’t mind that they missed… just like Panarin. I do think, however, if it’s last Thursday and Seattle knows they’re getting Chase Reid… just like with O’Brien not being in the package, I don’t think they make that offer. I’ll agree with witt here, (but for different reasons) I think the front office may have dodged a bullet on this one.
It wasn’t that Robertson didn’t want to come to Seattle. He doesn’t want to go anywhere. He wants to stay in Dallas, and he wants them to figure it out.
Really?
Yes.
Pure speculation. He obviously doesn’t want to stay that bad or he would not be being shopped when Dallas was trying to trade him.
I don’t know what that means.
Yes
Great piece John – I felt the same gut punch. Remind me which episode of Wheel of Time has the following quote, “Here’s to maintaining some cap flexibility and seeing how the season unfolds.”? Ha ha ha.
My first reaction when I saw the push for Robertson wasn’t awe – it was “Holy Desperation Macaroni”.
Robertson didn’t want to come to Seattle the way Thomas, Kyrou, Panarin and Tuch didn’t want to come to Seattle. Stop being in denial y’all.
John spelled it out in the article: The Kraken are years away from meaningful contention. A star, a winger to boot, isn’t going to change that. In fact, Robertson saved the Kraken FO from themselves. The Kraken need to build through the draft and cannot afford to waste assets. The Kraken are not Vegas. The sooner Leiweke accepts this fact the better for the org. (It’s also pretty clear that he won’t- the Kraken will keep going “Big Name Hunting” even if it’s stupid and counterproductive – but they are desperate for a Name to be the marketing poster boy).
The situations are not at all the same. Panarin only wanted to go one LA. Thomas was never really on the table. Kyrou is old enough he wants to “win now” and Robertson is playing games to get Dallas to raise their offer.
Sometimes you need to read what’s being said and not distort it to confirm your own biases.
Why did the Kraken offer the declining Panarin a ridiculous offer then? Because they knew he wanted the Big City but tried to dissuade him by throwing bags of money at him, to no avail of course. Seattle lacked the pull.
Why did the Kraken make an outrageous offer to Robertson when they must have known he was likely to turn them down? And so on. What difference does it make to Robertson if he gets 15 million a year or 16 million a year for 8 years if he gets to play meaningful hockey at a place he likes? Seattle is not that place, clearly.
The point, that you are avoiding, is simply that Seattle is not an attractive hockey destination for the big stars at this point in time. If it was these offers would have worked after all. This is what John is writing about in the article.
Rumors have Seattle interested in Marchenko. This is a guy that’s more in Seattle’s area of the totempole. He has no NTC to complicate things and he is not a “Big Star” yet even if he’s a good player. He is, however, an RFA next year and can use that to say he won’t sign long term with the Kraken.
I mentioned it elsewhere, but Marchenko is eligible for an extension day-after-tommorow so a Marchenko deal and a Robertson deal are pretty much same-same… RFA sign-and-trade for big bucks – I would assume. Personally, depending on the package, I’ll take Chase Reid and Kiril Marchenko over Jason Robertson.
If you’re going to ignore the well documented reporting out there, there’s no point in having a discussion. Just like with Robo and Dallas, LA was low balling him so he threatened to go elsewhere and what do ya know… LA found some money in the coach cushions.
The point you’re missing is neither of these players ever had any intention of going anywhere but LA (Panarin) and Dallas (Robo).
This has been confirmed by multiple sources for both players. When are yall gonna start listening to people instead of just yelling all the time?
Why is Seattle willing to play the fool in hopeless pursuit of Big Name Star players if they have no chance?
We all know Panarin wanted the Big City life, I never denied that. Gavrikov (ex-LA) sold him on LA once it became clear Panarin was not wanted anymore by the Rangers. Panarin signed with New York precisely because he wanted the Big City life (with a strong Russian diasphora) in the first place, back then the NYR pipped the Islanders last minute for his signing. Seattle offered Panarin 14m x 3 years, Panarin signed for 11m x 2 years in LA so clearly it was not about the money.
I doubt Robertson will get significantly more money elsewhere than Seattle offered, he wants to control his destination and that destination is obviously not Seattle. I never denied that either, which is why I think it was STUPID by the Kraken to even try, since it is obvious they lack the pull…
CLEARLY the Kraken FO must understand this but can’t help themselves. Why? It only makes them look stupid and like richie riches trying to solve their problems by throwing money at them, instead of having an actual plan.
I see we chose the screaming at the clouds route.
Meh, the media is making so much more of a deal of this because it’s fun to crap on the Kraken. Neither him, or especially Panarin, were going to ever come here. I appreciate the Kraken’s efforts, but also feel they targeted the wrong players. Robertson also declined offers from Dallas and St. Louis, so obviously it’s not just a Seattle problem. And as far as Panarin is concerned, he only wanted to go to warm/sunny, big market teams and LA was the only one who could make that work cap-wise.
I do think it’s worthwhile to examine *why* “they targeted the wrong players” – because it tells us a lot about the mindset of the FO.
They have yet to target the wrong players. Both these guys fit the clear organizational need of an star offense player
Why repeat the NYR mistake of building around Panarin? It was an failure even when he was at his peak, and now the Kraken attempted to throw big bags of money at him in his decline. That nonsense only highlights the orgs desperation.
The Kraken doesn’t even have a real 1C yet, nor is it close to a window of contention – a “star” winger isn’t going to change that. Going hard at being mid isn’t going to help this org go forward. That’s the Columbus template.
You continue to amaze me with your ability to ignore reality and avoid facts that don’t confirm your bias. Stay strong Don Quixote!
Non stop troll.
Wheel of Time is such a slog, I swear half that series is describing horses and outfits
first of all, where did i miss a wheel of time reference? second of all, if i have to hear one more time about the difficulties of men and women communicating ill lose my mind. great world building but its like the author just assumes that nobody under the age of 50 understands the opposite sex. i only kept reading because i wanted a payoff for the insane amount of time i put into reading it. luckily half a book dedicated to a single battle worked for me.
“To steal a line from the Wheel of Time: “We bury our dead and move on. What else is there?””
Agreed, I can’t believe I made it through the entire series.
Highly recommend the Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn trilogy (there are another 4 books that have just come out that follow the trilogy) and also Realm of the Elderlings
The Mariners long ago learned the lesson about building a team up. Rarely does in occur through a trade or free agency. The best route takes oodles of patience, but it’s the draft. Besides, it’s a lot cheaper but the return on investment is far better.
The Mariners are not a great example of a championship caliber club. Ms have never won a league championship, not in 49 years. Fangraphs and others project Ms to successfully defend the AL West, but their starting lineup tonight has Crawford (trade), Canzone (trade), Arozarena (trade), Naylor (trade), Robles (free agent). Their 26-man active roster currently has 17 non-draftees and 9 draftees, and 40-man roster has 31 non-draftees and 9 draftees, not exactly a draft and develop club.
The Krakens entire MO has been draft and develop. However, if you don’t win the lottery it’s impossible to get elite talent and developing talent takes 5 years. Robertsons first 30 goal season was exactly then. Our first year of prospects is just now starting to enter the league.
This is simply not accurate. The Kraken have a fascination for middle six types to the point of fetishization. They sign such types every year to the detriment of actual draft position and development of drafted prospects. That’s one reason why the Kraken are mired in mediocrity for the foreseeable future.
San Jose e.g. is a team that actually has focused on the draft primarily. San Jose gave up on the fiction of making the playoffs with a crap team. They’ve drafted well and do a good job developing their prospects and, as a result and flawed as they are, they are already a better team than the Kraken with an projectable window of contention opening within the next few seasons.
It is nonsense to claim that is all down to lottery luck. San Jose have executed a deliberate plan and done it well so far under Grier. In contrast the Kraken’s plan of stuffing the team with middling vets the prospects have to fight their way through, but can’t because the dino coach loves veterans and has a mandate to “win now” with a crap team, is downright counterproductive and therefore stupid.
Now the Kraken are looking for a “Star forward” the same way Columbus Blue Jackets went after Johnny Hockey. Becoming the Columbus PNW of the NHL is a real possibility under current leadership. It is the worst of the worst fates for this org that must be fought fiercely and ceaselessly.
I see the merit in taking the Shark’s approach and I also think they’ve been lucky AND executed well. I do think, however, there are a couple issues with the comparison.
First, the Sharks went into their “rebuild” after a long, long period of success. While they didn’t win a Cup, they were a legit contender for a decade. Even with that well established winning identity, their attendance plummeted as they leaned into the rebuild. I don’t know that going “full tank” is really an option for a new team without an established market trying to grow a fanbase.
Second, the Sharks had a horrible cap and roster structure that required major surgery. I think to some degree this left them no alternative. The Kraken have been able to avoid handcuffing themselves in this way even if you account for the Stephenson and Grubauer contracts. I don’t think this should prevent them from “tanking”, but it doesn’t put them in the “no alternative” position the Sharks found themselves in.
Something Friedman said once has really stuck with me, “folks look at the exceptions too much”. He was talking about the Blues winning the Cup, but I think you can say the same about the Sharks. I think a more realistic appraisal has to balance the risk of the tank with the pressures on the organization. I definitely get the appeal and I think the logic is sound – though somewhat more complicated than folks acknowledge – but I can also understand why the approach isn’t the “scorched earth” that the Shark’s went with.
https://x.com/i/status/2071973654775103991
Dom shares the view that the Kraken are going nowhere as they are. Btw, before people sh*t on Dom’s opinion, his model had the Kraken finish bottom 5 last season, pretty much where they ended up – in sharp contrast to the huff and puff about “making the playoffs” pushed by the Kraken FO.
Yes, the Sharks have their own path like every org. But they took a decision, like other clubs before them, and are emerging out of the dark times.
My counter argument to Friedman is – too many teams in the NHL are stuck in some brainless autopilot mode, doing things the same old dino way year in year out because they lack imagination and guts.
wittmont, you lost any credibility you could still kling to when you quoted Dom L. He’s even more myopic than the commenters in here tend to be.
Daryl, you’re correct in that the Sharks success vs ours is almost entirely due to the dumb luck of winning the lottery in the right draft. We’ve unfortunately had our highest picks in pretty mid drafts.
I guess the biggest difference in our views is the idea that the alternatives aren’t necessarily “brainless” but I think most folks are binary in their thinking and full of conviction.
I think one thing everyone can agree on is that the kraken haven’t done a good job so far with their plan if they ever had one other then just trying to make the playoffs. Proof is obvious in that our first GM was fired.
Something has to change and we haven’t seen anything other than trying harder to get into the playoffs. If you hit your head against the wall harder will you break it down or just completely knock yourself out? I think better odds of knocking yourself out, we’ve seen them drop big contracts in the offseason to get over the hump and nothing is or has worked.
Those that are calling for a change in the way the Kraken plan their future are not wrong as it’s just so obvious that they can’t get it right.
There are many examples of teams that have done well in their planning and those that haven’t. The kraken are in a difficult situation Daryl you’re right that it’s probably not the best route for the kraken to go full rebuild but they could and should get rid off players like CS and commit to our future.
Maybe that becomes a short term drop in standing and we get a few more good draft picks before we start improving, we already have a base of young players so it would not need to be a full rebuild. Is that really a bad idea, we’re obviously not in a position to do what the FO wants we see the rejection and we hear what the rest of the league thinks about us and our plans.
I’m not sure I see a scenario – other than luck – where the Kraken were not getting the player they got at the top of the draft. From what Wheeler says, who I trust, Reid was actually at the top of their board among defensemen. The lottery went one and two and I don’t think they were taking Malholtra (another center) so I just don’t get what the scenario is they missed out on here. I think it’s clear they are, as you say, more than one player away. They’re also more than a handful of late, late firsts or seconds away too. That’s what they missed out on by not “moving guys out”.
I get the sense of “directionlessness” but I think this season is a good example of how I’m not sure the alternative is what folks think it might be. They’re playing the young guys and, according to folks like Chris Peters, maybe too much. They got the best draft pick they were going to get, period.
If they’d gone full tank as prescribed… they’d have a bunch of cap space, a couple more draft picks in the 25 – 65 range and they would have selected 3rd or 4th in the draft… and folks would be talking about how “good this all is”. We’d be the Canucks.
Well, the Kraken have a ton of cap space, Dom (speaking of) just published an article arguing seconds and late first are significantly overvalued, and they were going to end up with Chase Reid no matter what… and “it’s all so terrible”.
I wasn’t commenting on this yeaxrs draft picks, I do feel they got pretty lucky with that one and that’s great. I also feel that there is a pretty solid argument that last season was possibly the worst ever kraken season, dumping CS and moving some of the younger guys up the lineup might not look much worse.
Just saying we have a ways to go and some things to figure out, it could be a very good strategy to focus on development as our top priority for the next couple of years… no? Stop this obsession with mediocre free agents etc…
They are very concerned about winning for the fan base I feel but it’s done nothing but shoot them selfs in the foot. Much like RF’s famous weaponizing the cap, if only we knew at the time the weapon was a suicide bomb.
So as guys like Jaden Schwartz and Jamie Oleksiak and maybe even Eeli Tolvanen… as those guys’ contracts come up maybe they should let them walk?
I would, and not be replacing them with similar products. Preferably trading them for something rather than letting them walk though.
Hindsight is 20/20 but some of us were yelling for deadline deals because the handwringing was on the wall but we just ignored it. A lot of pretending going on last season.
On today’s Puck Soup McIndoe and Lambert have a good discussion about tanking. I think it’s worth a listen.
Good podcast Daryl what are your thoughts.
I’ve said it many times, I don’t feel the kraken should go full tank but they called it, you can’t win a cup without tanking. I agree with them that it’s unfortunate that that’s the way the league is but it is. Also it’s becoming very obvious that the CBJ is the model the Kraken have taken, it’s a very odd model to strive towards.
In addition to the tank debate on Puck Soup, Elliott Friedman’s year end edition of 32 Thoughts today had what I thought was a good angle on the Kraken. There a little something for folks on both sides I think.
You’re again ignoring reality to confirm your bias. The players received in the expansion draft were middle lineup guys, but there’s a reason all of our contract were set to expire year 5 and 6. The FO has also publicly stated they were going the draft and develop route.
San Jose didn’t focus on the draft. They did a tear down and won the lottery. We’ve had a similar number of top 10 picks as them and literally the only difference is they’ve won the lottery twice.
If you can’t win the lottery, you either need to wait for your kids to actually develop or find someone in a trade. You continue you really don’t understand the league or the situations on the teams you talk about.
Troll
You can believe what you want but the hockey universe doesn’t agree.
Nino, you really need to go touch some grass. You keep labelling someone a troll while literally stalking comments from someone you don’t agree with. Don’t look in the mirror, you may not like what you see.
If the hockey universe disagress with the facts listed above, they are no more informed than you (which is pretty accurate)
What do we think of the Sharks giving 31 year old Mason Marchment 5 x $7m?
…and 32 year old Jacob Trouba to 4 x $8.25m?
Those that hate Stevenson contract should be able to see more clearly how similar they all are in talent along with age and what going rate actually is…
So many reasons to hate that contract other than the cap hit.
…and now you can add 31 year old Darnell Nurse at 4 x $9.25m with a full NMC throughout.
Obviously I don’t like marchment but I don’t feel that he’s being brought in to push the youth movement further down the ladder. I think it’s a very different situation than what Seattle has been doing.
Nothing wrong with vets in the lineup, it’s just a problem with how Seattle went about it. Seattle and SJ are teams going in different directions.
Well, I don’t think Darnell Nurse is going to push Shakir Mukhamaudillin down the ladder considering they sent the 24 year old former first rounder who they got in the Timo Meier deal to Edmonton.
I guess sometimes the young guys don’t work out.
Apart from Shane Wright not getting more defensive zone draws… who is being “pushed down the ladder”?
I’m quite sure the front office and both of the Kraken’s recent head coaches would much rather have Chandler Stephenson centering the third line, but it seems to me that’s on Wright more than anyone else. Berkly Catton should’ve been in the AHL but that wasn’t an option so rather than “pushing him down the ladder” to Spokane they had him in the NHL all season. Jani Nyman started the season on the roster but I think any honest assessment would have a hard time arguing he was “pushed down the ladder” to Coachella to make room for some aged vet. These other players: Winterton, Molgaard, Melanson – I’m curious what your perception is of those guys?
I’m sorry, but when I hear you talk about these guys being blocked I just shake my head. Those young guys in San Jose and Anaheim that are getting top six minutes… those aren’t the players the Kraken have.
i was really excited to see nyman last year but it became apparent quickly he isnt engaged consistently and loses a lot of defensive battles. that can get better but i see why he got pushed back to coachella. hope he grew this offseason on his defensive side and his battle level. his shot is fantastic though. if they dont park catton in coachella to cook this year (i dont see it as probable since he already put in a full season) i expect him to have much better year. you can see that he has it in him (if he keeps his head up) but i can see him getting discouraged early if he doesnt start a lot better than last year. even though he takes bad penalties and cant figure out how not to get called for goaltender interference (he had 2 goals waved off off the top of my head) he is a lot of fun to watch just run people over every single shift. curtis douglas may take that role from him this year. i assume wints is staying up. i know you werent asking me but i had an answer anyway.
I agree with all of that. I think we’ll see a lot of the “young guys” all season… just as we have been.
@daryl w: i forgot to say i was talking about melanson in the last sentance but i feel like you picked up on that, although catton takes too many bad high sticking penalties as well. thats just being young though.
Why aside from Wright? He was a projected first overall pick and we’ve done nothing to shape him into a top 6 player. He was looking good the season before last along with Nyman for that matter.
We brought in a coach that doesn’t value offensive or youth and the rest is history. Disagree well that was the only thing the audit showed apparently, we need to do a better job developing our prospects….
Winterton, Molgaard, Melanson… it’s great that we brought these guys up and they can play. What is their ceiling, bottom 6 I would safely assume. Honestly does it matter whether we draft and develop our third and fourth line players? No absolutely not it’s totally meaningless, those guys are a dime a dozen and easy to acquire, but I do like them and I gives you a warm fuzzy knowing that we drafted them I guess?
What we need is to do a better job of developing our top 6 prospects, that’s really the only thing that matters significantly.
We’ve done such a poor job with Wright that we probably get to see him succeed in another city. I don’t feel that it’s “on wright” as to why he isn’t getting top six minutes, I feel it’s on LL and the management that brought in guys like CS.
How’s this working out for us?
Wright has been given highly shelter NHL minutes and simply been asked to play a “two way” game. Chandler Stephenson isn’t blocking him, he’s allowing him to take 70%+ of his faceoffs in the offensive zone and over 80% of his starts.
Honestly… I just shake my head.
So you don’t agree we haven’t developed him well, interesting. When you look at a hell of a lot of high draft picks we have one player playing in the top 6 and if you project further out it looks about the same. We simply have not done a good job developing players that matter. You can blame the players or you can blame the system that’s developing them. I can tell you one thing for 100% certainty, LL was not hired to help develop our top talent. That in itself is a massive brain fart being that that’s the only thing the audit pointed out.
“A hell of a lot of high draft picks…” Really?
Two guys taken in the top five. One of those the first won the Calder Trophy and is developing into a Selke finalist. He’s been this team No.1 or No.1A center since he was 20. The other “high draft picks” (Catton and O’Brien) are draft plus one and two. What are you talking about?
I suppose it’s probably Ron Francis’ fault also that Shane Wright dropped from presumptive No.1 overall to No.4… or maybe he’s just not all that. The Almighty Ducks who are geniuses at development just shipped the guy taken one spot after Matty Beniers in 2021, but not before they signed him to 6 x $7m a year ago. I guess that’s on Quenneville.
“we’ve done nothing to shape him into a top 6 player”
Are you kidding? They kept giving him favorable draws both in this past season and in the season prior. They put veterans on both his wings for most of the time. That is except for when they tried playing Ryan Winterton on his wing, but then Winterton played better with Chandler Stephenson than he did with his old Firebirds teammate. What the hell else can a pro team possibly do for a guy? Give him a bunch more defensive zone draws? Play him against first and second lines when other teams’ third lines keep shutting him down? What does shaping look like to you?
inb4 “more ice time.” What more ice time? Should Wright have taken some of Matty’s offensive zone draws against top lines when Matty was actually getting the job done? Should he have taken some of Stephenson’s brutal assignments? I can’t think of a better way to prepare him for a bottom-six role. Where exactly are the chances that Wright wasn’t given?
Smalls I’m going to give you the benefit of doubt in that you probably don’t play hockey or at least not be paying attention to the small details in game.
First look at the ice time, it’s very hard to get into a game when you barely see the ice. Second if you paid attention you would have noticed what he was doing on the ice. Simple plays get pucks in get pucks out for the most part. If he tried to be creative and make plays that didn’t work (oh and that will happen even to McDavid) his head would hang and if they happen to show the bench you’d see a furious LL. It’s was backed up by the way by LL himself saying the Wright needs to learn how to play defense before learning to play offensively.
The kraken have admitted they haven’t developed their prospects well, this is the prime example. When you have a potential top line player you need to allow them to make a few mistakes, you need to let them play hockey the way that they did that made you think they should be drafted.
I’m not saying that you shouldn’t be helping them develop their defensive side of the game but WTF are you thinking if that’s the only focus?
Same goes for Nyman to some extent (although he has more holes to his game). You have a player that can absolutely wire the puck almost an ovy quality shot. You don’t even play him on the power play because that would cut into C F’n S’s ice time!!!! I can absolutely guarantee you that having CS on the PP is not going to help you win games in three years but having some patience with a guy like Nyman and getting him into the PP so he can develop absolutely could.
We’re living day to day.
“First look at the ice time, it’s very hard to get into a game when you barely see the ice.”
LOL inafter “more ice time.” Again, what ice time exactly? Should Wright have gotten more of the time that Stephenson got in the defensive zone or more of the time that Matty got in the offensive zone? Should they have shortened the bench and left Melansen, Meyers, and Winterton out?
And Nyman was unplayable. He was a -4 in the game before he got sent back down to Coachella Valley. A coach could not rightly put him on the ice with a bunch of other guys who are competing to win. It would be a disservice to them. The AHL is the place for Nyman until he learns to play without the puck. He has all the skill in the world with the puck, but in hockey a player spends most of his time on ice without it.
How about more ice on both ends of the rink…. And yes more ice time is one of the key factors in developing top six players.
You forget so quickly that both of these players looked so much better playing for a different coach the season before. That’s not to be forgotten. Yes they didn’t do well under LL but the way he was asking them to play wasn’t their game. It would be similar to asking a lineman in the NFL to become a wide receiver. They can try but probably not do it very well. A good coach knows how to get the best out of his players and not every player can play the same way, they made it to the NHL because of the skill set they have, use it.
I applaud Smalls and Daryl’s efforts here but at some point you just have to cut and run and realize you’re taking to someone who’s so determined to be wrong that they’ll ignore any and all evidence. That and they’ll just make ad hominems to deflect from having to question their views z
You’re both right BTW
Troll
Yes Nino, we know you’re a troll. No need to keep broadcasting that.
San Jose are executing a deliberate plan. The tank stage is over. Their kids (Celebrini, Stenberg, Smith, Misa etc.etc.) are leading the charge, now they brought in vets to support the kids. SJ are going for the playoffs now to give the kids experience. By the time the SJ kids are in their mid 20s, with a wealth of experience, these admittedly ridiculous vet contracts will age out and SJ can fix the backend to compete for the cup for real. By then Dickinson, Verhoeff and Lin should be well established.
Contrast this with the Kraken where Stephenson, Montour and Dunn are the main players and the kids get fringe minutes; we have one (1) kid in the top 6 who gets decent minutes… maybe two with Samoskevich now, but he is not drafted by us. SJ was already a better team than the Kraken last season and now they’ve upgraded. SJ should make the playoffs next season, while the Kraken remains a fringe playoff hopeful at best.
The SJ wagon is on track. The Kraken is just lost.
If Stephenson, Montour and Dunn were limiting the opportunities for Seattle’s prospects or straining the cap I’d be “worried” about those contracts too, but (contrary to what Nino thinks) I just don’t see the evidence that’s happening. It sounds like – and I could be getting this wrong obviously – those contracts are a problem because they are standing in the way of the Kraken being worse? Is that wrong? It can’t be purely a “value” proposition (and I don’t think it’s ever that simple) because if that was the yardstick the Sharks had an absolute awful day regardless of “the plan”. So I assume it’s something else. It does sound like you too think the way to develop Catton and Wright and Nyman and whoever else is to just put em on the top six, is that right? Do you honestly think they just show up in the office without a plan or do you think they have a plan but it just sucks so bad it’s like not having one at all?
It seems like that eye-popping -41 goal differential is an issue the “wagon” needs to address and so far I haven’t seen anything to indicate they have. It seems like their defense has actually gotten worse.
I don’t know about you, but I’m looking forward to next season already.
Go Kraken!!!
Ok Daryl I get it you don’t think we have any home grown talent worthy of being on the team in any meaningful way. Maybe just to fill a few holes at the bottom of the lineup so we don’t have to blow out our cap by signing some 2M plug to fill that hole. Maybe our drafting just sucked then because these teams around us seem to get their home grown players into the top of the lineup.
It sounds like you completely disagree with the only thing of value that came out of the audit. We’ve been doing a great job developing our youth pay no attention to the smoke.
We’ve also apparently done a good job so far and all of our criticism is completely wrong. The plan is 100% on track nothing to see here. It doesn’t matter that we’re on our third coach who should have been fired, fired our “GM”, gone through an audit and had ownership publicly state things have gone wrong. It doesn’t matter that we are the least significant team in the entire League and every second article you read wants to rub that in just so we don’t forget.
It’s painfully obvious that the train has derailed, all you are doing right now is cherry picking people’s criticism without actually saying anything of your own. Tell us then if you are so sure we’re wrong. Go ahead and tell us what exactly is the problem if it’s not what we think it is then you must know, you must be sitting there laughing your ass off thinking that these idiots who have followed hockey their entire lives don’t even know what the real problem is with the kraken and (evil laughter) I’m not going to tell them.
I’ve said all this before, I’ll say it all again Nino. You can disagree with it and I certainly don’t have the conviction of my views that some folks do so I think it’s as likely as not that my perceptions are mistaken. Do me a favor though, so I don’t have to regurgitate this all over again, take it in. You don’t have to agree and you can even say, “that’s ridiculous” but at least register it rather than dismissing it as “nothing said” because you don’t agree.
I start with the idea that the folks running an NHL organization have some professional qualification and knowledge and aren’t just throwing darts here. With that in mind I don’t begin with what I or the pundits think they should be doing, I try and understand what I think they are trying to do.
From the get go I think they’ve been clear about the need to draft and develop players. I also think that’s the approach they’ve taken so I’ll try and answer your “what’s the problem” question starting from there.
The Kraken had the “good fortune” of selecting in the top four in their first two drafts and the “bad fortune” of those being two of the weakest drafts in recent memory. We’ve all heard the Chuck Holmes Cutter Gauthier take and, personally, I think it’s disingenuous and selective to blast the Kraken for the top ten picks they’ve made – or most of their picks really. It doesn’t seem to me that the Kraken have been poor at drafting, but they haven’t been “lucky”.
As to development, I honestly don’t know the first thing about developing professional NHL players and when I listen to folks I hear all angles from “Play the young guys” to “Don’t rush them”. It seems to me most of the takes on development are uninformed and I don’t have the ability to make any sort of legitimate claim myself. Do I think “sheltering” Shane Wright is what they should be doing? Yes, but that’s not worth anything. What seems like the most likely explanation for why Seattle’s young players aren’t the “studs” the Sharks and Ducks have is because they aren’t the “studs” the Sharks and Ducks have. Development can only do so much and some of it is on the player. As for the audit. I didn’t hear anything about player usage. What I heard was more support staff to focus on – I’m assuming a bit here – enhancing skills and fitness. That sounds great, but I don’t think that’s what’s holding Shane back.
I’ll add more later Nino. This doesn’t yet get to “what the problem is”, but I have things I need to do and this is already TLDR.
Ok I’m looking forward to your view on what went wrong. I don’t think anyone can say with a straight face that this is all according to plan especially when we’ve seen the fallout in the FO and ownership come straight out and say this isn’t the plan and we’re not doing well enough.
“Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the face”.
– Mike Tyson
Ok… so I think their plan has been draft and develop and that’s where it starts. To review, I think they didn’t get “lucky” with their first couple drafts and I don’t have the knowledge or confidence in the media or fan views to try and analyze and second guess their development approach. I know you’re comfortable doing this, I’m not. With that, I have a hard time saying with any confidence it’s a development problem.
If I can’t say it’s on accout of development, what about the drafting. As you mentioned, by their own accord, something is not working. One option would be more picks, but honestly, they’ve had a lot of picks. While the Kraken didn’t add any picks at all in the expansion draft, over the following eight months Francis acquired 13 picks including four 2nds… but no 1st.
Now, without relitigating the expansion draft, it’s hard to see how the Kraken were going to land a valuable 1st in expansion. The closest option was Calgary with Giordano, and Treliving made it clear he wasn’t moving No.13 overall. Eight months later the best Seattle could get was two 2nds. Say what you will about free agency, I think the Kraken have done well on their trades overall and I think most folks being honest would agree. So it seems to me they’ve done well on the quantity of picks, but the quality hasn’t been there and the reality is the picks they need – the “high quality” 1st – are only coming through the lottery. And of course, we know how you get those. Luck and suck… and they haven’t had enough of either – except maybe this recent draft. While the Kraken could have “sucked” more, they “lucked” into getting the best player that was going to be available to them regardless.
I’ll get into “luck and suck” later…
Luck and suck… also know as tanking. I think the whole thing is pretty well understood and I’ve conceded on many occasions the appeal and utility of that approach. Again, relitigating that here isn’t worth the effort; however, I do think there is an important “point of contention” I need to discuss because it informs my opinion. While I recognize the “success rate” of tanking, I think there are other ways to build a “contending” team. I also think the “failure rate” is too readily dismissed or rationalized away by a lot of proponents. Like I said, diving into this is too huge and if, for you, that’s all there is to it, there’s probably not much to discuss. For me, this point of contention – it’s either tank or nothing – is for many intractable. It is not intractable for me and I’m open to either option. For Vancouver, a team that had all the pieces but came up short… by all means, tank away. So far they’ve done the “suck”, but they didn’t get the “luck”. For other teams, maybe that’s not their situation… which brings us to Seattle.
Like everything so far, this is all stuff I’ve posted before, (recently in fact) so I’ll try and make this brief… but a quick recap: Draft and develop, I can’t blame it on development, plenty of picks but not plenty of quality and very little luck, there may be more than one way to build a team AND not every team is in a position to tank.
So this last part, to me, this is Seattle. As a brand new team trying to establish a fanbase, it’s hard to see how they can commit to the tank in a manner that would at least have some chance of success. Without dragging through the whole thing, I’ll just go to Dom’s basic requirement to even be considered a “tank” team – minimum three top five picks in six years. As he says, depending on the quality of the draft, maybe more. Seattle’s first two drafts – their “top five” drafts – definitely fit in the “low quality” category. So the reality of a Kraken tank would have them now going into season six not only without the excitement and fan enthusiasm of season two, but also an entrenched culture of trying to lose. Furthermore, there’s not even a likelihood they’re “the Sharks” because this whole time the Sharks (and the Ducks) have been right there being the Sharks. It’s not like they get to trade places with them. The reality may well be the current team and the “tank” team aren’t really all that different. As I’ve mentioned before, the team that, to me, looks the most like Seattle is Detroit. They finished bottom five in the league three years in a row (including dead last) and bottom nine six years in a row and they got one top five pick – a No.4… they did the suck, but they didn’t have the luck. I have a hard time believing fans of a brand new team – and a new sport for many of them – are going to tolerate that sort of willful losing.
Yes, I know, they suck anyway and it’s better in the long run. I get it, you don’t need to explain it, it’s obvious… but I also think it’s more complicated than that, especially when you actually have to make the decision in real time rather than in hindsight.
So… what’s the problem? This starts to get at it – they’re in a tough spot. It is, to me, understandable that they can’t just tank whether that’s a worthwhile strategic plan or not… but I think it’s more than just that.
I moved my post to rhe bottom so it displays wider.
The off season isn’t even over yet and the Kraken are lost??? Huh…. I am willing to wait and see just how this team comes together and will be a loyal supporter this upcoming season no matter what.
Go Kraken!!!
https://x.com/JFreshHockey/status/2072433318365114655?s=20
Since everyone loves to reference the OG Stephenson hater whenever there’s a discussion on the Kraken, I’m quite confused as to why he’s being deliberately ignored when we’re talking about San Jose?
I mean you know the answer… Celibrini and Smith score and for those lacking critical thinking skills they just look and say “see do what San Jose did”. These folks are unable and unwilling to acknowledge that the only difference between these two teams over the last 5 years is winning the lottery in the right drafts. 5-10 other teams were just as bad as San Jose over that period and haven’t been anywhere close (See Chicago, for a history lesson see how long Arizona sucked and got nowhere)
still wondering if seattle offersheets robertson. if they do who are they moving out of the left wing? kakko? mccann?
It would be very funny is Seattle offer sheets Robertson right after he turned down the contract offer we pitched. Try try again 😂….. no not happening they surely have had enough egg in the face.
i think its more about robertson discovering that dallas isnt going to give him 14m and other contenders will (generally) have to turn over some roster to fit him at that level. *even if it goes to arbitration hes going to come in over what they can afford. dunno, the whole situation is weird. werenski turning down dallas was shocking as well.
i agree its really unlikely but when the opportunities to bank dry up or dont materialize a 2nd attempt may be successful. wouldnt go over 16m though. i also dont know how minnesota is going to be able to keep a competitive team when a D and wing are make 18m and 17m respectively. although hughes does skate almost half the game.
I don’t gamble but would wager Robertson will end up signing in Dallas for 8 x 14m.
i just dont know where theyre finding that money. thats always been the conversation on this. where theres a will theres a way but currently they dont have it. ill agree with you though for now. if he isnt signed by the end of the month i might not.
The problem I see with that prediction is there would be nothing to prevent them from flipping him to someone else in year one. They’ve already shown they’re willing to move him.
There’s literally zero egg on their face. As has been widely reported by now, Robo always wanted to stay in Dallas
I think Robertson signing an offer sheet is very unlikely.
If a team offers him, there’s no trade protection available in year one by the offering team.
If Dallas matches, they are only required to meet the term and dollars. They could disregard any trade protection clauses.
I don’t think Robertson is going to risk being in either of those two situations.
He’d have to accept it and there’s zero indication he has any intention leaving Dallas. It would also be 4 1st likely for a rental. I think it would be a colossal mistake for any team to try without certainly and that only comes from a sign and trade.
Cutis Douglas…
I absolutely love that signing. The team needed someone bigger than Melanson to make other teams think twice about throwing high shots at skilled guys. Also, I like how Douglas approaches fighting. Beforehand, he agrees to go with the player he is going to fight, skates back, and drops the gloves. Afterward, it looks like he says “good fight” to the other guy. There is chivalry to it. He isn’t running up on a guy from behind and ambushing him like scumbags such as Tyler Meyers do. Douglas even has some offensive skills that showed up in the AHL before Tampa gave him the role he is currently knwon for. I could see him playing with Ben Meyers and Jacob Melanson without making the fourth line worse. The fact that Douglas is young just makes it better.
So Curtis Douglas is 6’9 and likes to fight. Well the Kraken could use more toughness from someone who can get in there to defend a teammate when needed.
Ok… so what’s the problem?
For me when I think about this I start from the idea the team is taking a “draft and develop” approach. I think they’ve demonstrated that. I also accept that in their position they can’t simply tank. For a lot of folks the conversation ends right there, and that’s fine. To me it’s not a matter of managements inability to understand that approach or their incompetence – that seems simplistic. I assume (which is all anyone can do here) they’ve examined the risks, benefits and consequences of “tanking” as a path to “success” and decided against it for legitimate reasons. That might be a mistake and you can rail against it all you want, but it seems to me that’s the reality.
Drafting and developing takes a long time, whether you tank or not. For a team that’s “not tanking”, they’ve sure had a lot of decent picks draft position-wise, but they almost certainly haven’t landed one of the half-dozen or so “superstars” that have been drafted since they entered the league. Obviously it’s too early to know anything on O’Brien and Reid. Catton clearly should have been in the AHL last season, but his counting stats and those of Jack Hughes in his first NHL season are very close. Yes Hughes was a year younger but still, it’s also too early to know where Catton’s ceiling is.
So this digression on their prospects and tanking brings me to what I think is the fundamental “problem”… they aren’t in a position to tank AND drafting and developing takes time. The first part of that is highly debatable. The second part seems blindingly obvious… but that doesn’t mean folks are willing to accept it.
This has been A LOT of discourse to get to a rather simple observation… too much, but I want it to be clear Nino, why I think what I think before I get into the rest of the problem… all the mistakes.
So draft and develop takes time, whether you tank or not. Additionally, every team is going to make mistakes… and the Kraken have had their share.
If we start at the beginning, the first question would be did they hire the wrong GM? I know a lot of folks, maybe most, would say “Yes, they hired the wrong GM.” A lot of those same folks might not even realize they interviewed Bill Zito for the job but went with Ron Francis. Personally, I’m agnostic on this point. I don’t know that a different GM would have been better or worse. I will say in his defense, given his history in Carolina and his reputation for “patience”, they knew what they were getting and pretty much got exactly that. I do, however, think there are some legitimate reasons to think hiring Francis was a mistake… and the expansion draft was NOT one of them.
I know the “botched expansion draft” is now just a given, but I’ve yet to hear or read an actual convincing argument for this. It’s always about vague notions like “missed opportunities” or “puzzling choices” but any time there are specifics – which is seldom – they’re something like “Tarasenko”, a proposition that would have meant passing on Vince Dunn. “Where were all the trades”? – that was Sean McIndoe’s take immediately following the draft. The trades were the nine players who got turned into 13 picks over the next eight months. I’m sure folks will disagree, but for me there’s nothing with the draft worth revisiting.
The mistake of hiring Francis, to me, isn’t “on the ice”, it’s in the office. Now this is the sort of pure speculation I try and avoid, but it seems there are some observations to be had here. I was a little surprised to hear reports after the firing of Dan Bylsma that there was a split in the front office on the hire and that Francis had, in fact, wanted to go a different way but “relented”. I don’t know the particulars of this, but this sort of story doesn’t exactly fill me with confidence for a couple reasons. First, I’m all about collaboration, but if you’re the GM, you either get your guy or you get on board with the alternative. What absolutely does not happen is this story gets out and you, as GM, just meet it with a shrug. Again, I really don’t like to speculate, but it sounds like Francis may have been too passive within the management structure. To further complicate matters, – and this to me is the big one – he never laid out and communicated a vision or process for the organization. I do think those were there and are now there, but without an expression, many have simply – and understandably – concluded there is a lack of direction.
The internal issues may or may not have contributed to the challenges the organization is facing, I really can’t say, but I can’t imagine it’s helped. I do think, however, part of “the problem” has been under Francis the organization has not communicated it’s “vision” for the team on the ice… it’s plan. Saying “we want to be in the playoffs” isn’t a plan anymore than “tanking” is a plan – it’s a hope. There needs to be something more than “hope” to be an actual plan. Like I said, I think it’s there, but clowns like me shouldn’t have to try and ferret it out, they should be spelling it out. “We really like the player…” doesn’t cut it.
On the point of them not communicating “the plan”, the FO has been pretty clear their plan was draft and develop. Year 2 success sidetracked said plan, but this has been documented and well known. It’s also very evident in who they picked and the contracts they signed at the expansion draft. There’s a reason all those players were set to expire in 5 or 6 years and that’s the exact timeline where your prospects START to hit. Funnily enough, if you look at Robertson as an example, he was on roughtly a 5 year timeline from draft to NHL. He had a completely fine rookie season in year 4 post draft and hit his stride year 5.
I don’t know that I’d agree the front office has been pretty clear about their plan. Yes, they’ve verbalized that they are going to draft and develop. They’ve also been saying they expect to be in the playoffs every year. The two aren’t mutually exclusive, but when you have what appears to to be competing narratives you need to clarify that. I feel like that’s never happened.
On the expansion draft… I don’t see how you can say “it’s evident in who they picked and the contracts they signed”. I think it’s “accurate”, but judging by the chatter and the “legend” around the expansion draft, it’s hard to believe it’s “evident” to almost anyone. This comes back to the communication. Rather than making this explicit, Francis just sorta, kinda hemmed-and-hawed and muttered something about, “teams didn’t want to trade”.
I think it’s a bit unfair to blame Francis here. This was exactly the guy they hired and they knew what they were getting. Nonetheless, it falls on the guy with the title.
I was going to bring this up later, but the Stephenson signing is another case in point. This might be the perfect example of the competing narratives and the lack of communication. To me this seemed like a pretty clear case of trying to meet both objectives – draft and develop, and make the playoffs. I’ve gone into the D&D argument far too much to revisit, so I’ll very briefly state: Stephenson was signed to help the Kraken make the playoffs AND develop their young centers. When there was a huge clamor about this being an awful signing the response was, “We’ll, if you want those guys you’ve gotta give ’em seven years”. That was pretty much it, just another shrug. Now, it’s only been two seasons, but I think it’s safe to say the financial catastrophe that was predicted was “overstated”, but all the hand wringing and messaging that came out of the whole episode has been entrenched and any notion that there was more to the signing than making the playoffs (which they didn’t) was completely crowed out. To me, it was then the “I don’t understand what they’re doing” line started getting bandied about, and to be fair, when all you hear from the organization is crickets… what do you expect.
So far, under the new GM, I’m not sure how much things have changed on this front. They wanna make a “big splash” (playoffs) and they have a lot of young players in the NHL and on the way (D&D), but the messaging around the whole “audit” has only added to the confusion and I’ve yet to hear the organization say anything other than, “we need to do better”. Maybe I missed it.
I get why they don’t feel they can tank. What I don’t understand is what appears to be a complete refusal to communicate to the fans that this is going to take some time. When ALL you say is “we expect to be in the playoffs” and you’re not, to a lot if folks, it only looks like failure.
Saying you’re going to make the playoffs doesn’t contradict drafting and developing. They had a playoff capable lineup almost every year (sans Bylsma year) but things didn’t work out. The first season and even the third had some insanely bad injury luck.
As for the current direction it’s also clear they’re done sucking and actually putting together a more complete roster built around the coaches plan which is the way pretty much every competitive roster is built.
Whats ironic is last season they all but told people they didn’t expect to be super competitive this year. I’d go watch the press conference with Samantha again. They very clearly stated they were building toward a playoff capable roster. It’s just no one wanted to hear it
I very specifically said in an earlier part of this too, too long multi-episode diatribe that drafting and developing and playoffs are not mutually exclusive. I agree, they’ve stated they are building towards being a playoff team, a team that regularly makes the playoffs and can contend for a Cup. What they haven’t done is explain in anything other than platitudes what their plan is for achieving this. “We really like the player, he’s hard to play against” tells me nothing. I have an idea what direction they’re trying to go, but it’s not because, as a season ticket holder, I’ve heard anything other than, “We’re committed to winning”.
I appreciate all the good work they’ve done and I support the direction they’re following. I consider myself a strong supporter of the Kraken, but I simply cannot dismiss management and ownerships culpability in the public narrative that surrounds this team. They’re in a tough spot, but I think they need to do a better job of communicating. Maybe that was in the audit… maybe not. (you see what I did there? )
Well said Daryl.
I don’t comment as often as most, but do enjoy reading the various opinions and the back and forth among all the posts. I find myself mostly in line with what you have to say. For example- Your latest comment on the Stevenson situation.
Thanks for that. I was telling my wife just the other day how it’s pretty negative on here… expect this one poster, Bean. My favorites are, “What’s with all the Debbie Downers?”
Thanks for the levity and the fandom, I appreciate both… and hang in there, please.
Go Kraken!!!
The problem, as I see it, is you have an organization commited to drafting and developing that is understandably not in a position to tank. Additionally, they have not been lucky in the draft. This dynamic was compounded by a General Manager who, I believe, did a very poor job of communicating a plan or direction to the fans and the media.
This all seems to me rather broad. I think these are the fundamental problems the organization has faced and I believe it’s important to at least acknowledge these before digging deeper. Some of them have been beyond their control (draft lottery), and some are definitely debatable (not tanking), but the communication problem seems like a totally avoidable self-inflicted wound. But as I said, rather broad.
If you’re convinced anything short of tanking isn’t even worth considering then there’s probably not much to discuss. The “problem” is binary and you’ve already figured it out. If, on the other hand, you think the organization is failing it’s own objectives and that’s the problem you’re talking about, then I think it starts to get more specific… and there it’s probably best to start with the coaches.
I don’t know what makes a good NHL coach. I don’t know how to match man versus zone versus hybrid defensive structures to player personnel. I don’t know if a “player’s coach” is better than a “hard ass” or if it’s the other way around… and much like what I hear and read about development, I don’t have a lot of faith in the information that’s out there. So I’m not about to go on about the coaches being the problem… any of them. Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t. I do, however, feel comfortable saying three coaches in three years is a problem.
The team I saw on the ice the year after Dave Hakstol was a Jack Adams runner up looked almost nothing like the team from the year before – and I’m not talking about the fourth line. I don’t know if it was the coaching and I’m not even qualified to have a discussion about it. I will say, three years seems like it’s about the shelf life of a middling NHL coach and judging by the leaks following locker clean out, it’s not surprising the team moved on. What is surprising is the Dan Bylsma hire.
It’s not surprising they went with Disco Dan. By that I mean it doesn’t seem like it on the surface. What’s surprising is how it played out. I mentioned this earlier, but the reports of the internal debate are, I think, problematic.
And now they have Lane Lambert. Like I said, I don’t know enough to discuss it, but four coaches in four years ain’t happening. My suspicion is the problem is not the coaches. Certainly in some marginal way there may something there, but in the same way they’re not one player away, they’re not a coach away either.
I will make one uninformed, nonsense observation. It’s a rant I’ve ranted several times before… I do NOT want to hear, “Now we need to shoot the puck more!” All three coaches have gone down this path and every time this team has gone in the tank. I get it, volume, sure, fine, whatever… every time these guys try and shoot more they look like crap and lose… a lot! I don’t know what the answer is, but obviously these guys aren’t going to shoot their way out of Dodge.
I know this is a lot to say, “I don’t think it’s the coaches”, but I don’t think it’s the coaches.
Bylsma was a problem and so was Hakstol at the end. It was documented something was going on the last year of Hakstol but nothing specific leaked. Byslmas issues are well documented and known. They were covered on Marek and Wychinski shortly after the firing if you want to go dig it up. You could also see it on the ice. He had no scheme and would stick to whatever plan he had after 5+ games of losing hoping it would change. It was the worst hockey this team has ever played. Year 1 they just weren’t good. Year 4 was watching chickens with their heads cut off.
Like I said, I don’t put a lot of stock in fan or media appraisals of coaching.
Nor do I but I do value reporting and it was reported that Bylsma has had issues taking outside feedback and listening to others in the org. These weren’t appraisals but actual reports sourced from people on those teams.
The worst hockey this team has ever played was last season.
Only the end of last season. Let us not forget that they were contenders in the division for most of the year until the Olympic Break. Then for whatever reason the floor fell out from under them. That was bizarre.
We played horrid all season long, just about every game we won was off the back of stellar goaltending. Actual team performance was just about dead last in the league. I think our goaltending coach did well.
The goaltending was a real bonus last season, but in January for instance, both Beniers and McCann were around a-point-a-game players and each potted 10 goals in 17 games on the month. The Kraken’s 60 goals were behind only Buffalo and Montreal’s 61. It’s hard to see how that was on the goaltending.
It would be great if the goaltending continues to hold up, but I believe it’s a mistake to think this team is simply the one we saw after the Olympic break.
If anyone ever needed proof you don’t parse the game well or know what you’re talking about, it’s that comment you just made.
Thanks for proving the point I’ve been making for months now.
Troll
I agree with you that the “problem” hasn’t been the coach’s but the latest hire isn’t a coach you want to build a young squad around. It’s just not happening he’s the worst choice you could possibly make for the direction the kraken have to go in.
He was hired in a last ditch attempt from a failing “GM” to try and win games with a crappy team. He’s never been a capable head coach and certainly didn’t show us anything different last season. Our worst performance ever when accounting for the historically bad division we got most of our points from.
He’s not the problem but will be a problem moving forward… Shane Wright anyone? I’m almost positive a different coach could have built off of his previous season rather than forcing him to dump pucks. It’s obvious why he wants out and we will not be getting a better player in a trade.
This combines both player development and coaching evaluation… like I’ve said, you be you.
After way too much bloviating I’ll try and finally get into “the problem” as it pertains to the roster tomorrow.
Happy 4th of July!!!
Go Kraken!!!
I appreciate your posts, everyone has their own opinions.
If the priority is now development, it should be Lambert and Stephenson who get moved, not Wright.
Stephenson isn’t blocking anyone nor is Lambert. Shane needs to put the pieces together. Catton developed more in one year than Shane did in two and wasn’t given the favorable zone time. The same can be said about literally every other prospect who have proven the narrative false. Ice time is not what you think it is. This has been debunked time and time again, even on the pod.
This doesn’t fit with actual reality, we heard LL talk about how he wanted Wright to play… FYI it wasn’t his game or the reason he was drafted. You can make up stuff all you want but don’t state it as reality when you know absolutely nothing about the inner workings of the Kraken. If you purely speculate off of known evidence it shows there is a very strong possibility that the reason Wright didn’t work out was because of LL.
-He was showing promise under his previous coach
-he was getting minimal ice time under LL
-LL himself stated that Wright needs to focus on defense before offense… NOT WHAT HE WAS DRAFTED FOR.
-audit was done and it stated that improper development was the krakens biggest problem.
It’s just made up BS saying that there is no connection between wrights play last season and his usage under LL.
Known evidence: 1) Lambert sent Wright out for 77% of his draws in the offensive zone. 2) Wright got the same amount of ice time under Bylsma. 3) The audit was a nothing burger. 4) Wright was clearly outplayed by both Chandler Stephenson and Matty Beniers.
Ignore it if you like but is LL really the guy who should be developing offensive players?
The irony here, Nino, is you are literally ignoring facts. I have no problem having Lane, the coach trying to set him up for success, managing his development. As to your question, yes. McMann had no problem scoring goals under Lambert… neither did Eberle who a Kraken career high. You keep pointing the finger everywhere but the one place it makes the most sense (hint: Its Shane).
It’s really funny seeing you constantly trip over yourself to say I know nothing about the Kraken, when all I am doing is referring to public available data and interviews.
You also completely misquoted the audit results. They said it could be improved. That doesn’t even mean it’s bad, but rather that it could be better. This is just another case of you hearing what you want to hear to confirm you preexisting bias.
You replied to Daryl
“I just don’t know how anyone could argue with a straight face that LL wasn’t largely to blame for this situation with Wright.”
I can look you in the eye and tell you Shane didn’t come into camp any better last year than the year before. His FO% is still ass, he still makes easy avoidable mistakes and he’s not hitting the net. Despite being in the offensive zone more than most forwards his shots per 60 is in the bottom half of the teams. His shooting % is also well below anyone else’s. These are things Lambert has little ability to screw up. This is Shane not shooting and not being able to hit the net.
I know you won’t listen, but this hopefully is documentation for anyone else who might actually want to learn something.
Jean, thanks for the assist.
“…audit was done and it stated that improper development was the krakens BIGGEST problem.”
Is this correct? I guess I missed the “biggest” part. I thought it was more like a “for example” and the rest was buried. I also thought it was more of a “room for improvement” rather than “biggest problem”.
Honestly, I probably missed it… what was the “biggest problem” quote?
Maybe you are correct but I’d think if they only mentioned one thing that they were not doing well then it’s the biggest issue?
I just don’t know how anyone could argue with a straight face that LL wasn’t largely to blame for this situation with Wright.
It will be interesting to see if Wright has a much better season under a new coach….. we all know that’s going to happen, I would put money down if anyone is actually serious.
You’re right. It’s the only thing they decided to reveal. The Vincent hire was great for helping address that too.
So that means you don’t want a bet on this Koist? You talk a story but you know I’m right.
It’s curious you avoided reply to the wall of facts I gave you that pretty much destroy anything you have to say here.
I’ll lay some more facts at ya. Even if Shane leaves and does better on another team, that still doesn’t tell you it was the coach. You prove yet again, like you did above when you said last year’s play was the worst they’ve ever played, that you really fundamentally don’t understand the game or how the league works. You really should listen more, and talk less.
Going back to ignoring you but I know you can’t resist replying to me.
Can anyone tell me just what is going on with the Almighty Ducks!?
Even if they get $4.5m in cap relief for Troy Terry, they’ve only got about $15m left for Cutter Gauthier. That should be enough, but does anybody think the guy who forced his way out of Philly is going to take a haircut for Pat Verbeek? Do they think since he can’t sign an offer sheet he’ll take whatever they offer him. After they squeeze him in, what are they gonna do about that backend now that Mintyukov (a guy they were looking at moving recently) is getting $7.2m? I didn’t watch a lot of Ducks last season, but I think their defense had some issues and now it’s gotten even worse.
I’m honestly curious how they pull this off. I’m sure there’s a lot I don’t know and I’m missing here, but they look like they just took a huge u-turn.
The cap reaper comes for everyone eventually. They have movable contracts if they need to, but even Terry is only going to be a month or so of cap relief and the reaper will just come the second month of the season.
This looks a little more like Verbeek invited the reaper over for dinner and served can salmon mousse.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes
So the roster… certainly this IS the problem, right?
“You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.”
– Donald Rumsfeld, 2004
I guess I’ll start with the obvious… they don’t have “elite” talent and that’s something you definitely need to compete for a Cup, but I think the quote captures the reality. This IS the roster they have, so the question is really, why. If the roster is the problem, why is this the roster they have?
I touched on it earlier, but I’ll repeat it once more here… there was no path to “elite” talent in the expansion draft – period! If someone wants to lay out something specific, I’m all ears. I feel like any actual legitimate proposals based on “real time” dimensions is far fetched, but even with the benefit of hindsight… I’m just not seeing it. Like I said, if someone wants to venture something defensible, by all means… and trading shit for shinola isn’t defensible.
So going back to earlier… draft and develop, and though they didn’t make any trades during the expansion draft, they did add a lot of picks in the shadow of the draft. Also going back, they understandably didn’t choose to tank, so instead it seams, to me, they assembled a roster they believed could challenge for a playoff spot, but was also constructed to allow turning over players for future assets. It appears, to me, in season one they nailed the turnover, but missed on the playoffs… what happened?
Goaltending. This isn’t some novel observation. The catalog of teams whose aspirations have been undermined by failures in net is legion. At the same time, this isn’t a pass for Ron Francis. The Grubauer signing was an avoidable mistake. I applauded it at the time and so did most of the media. I’ve got the articles. “Top three goalie tandem in the league”… there were a bunch, including Dom. Nonetheless, these guys are professionals and this is exactly the sort of mistake us couch-bound parrots cheer as brilliant but they’re supposed to know well enough to avoid. Some considered the signing of Grubauer a “coup”. Unfortunately, the reality turned out quite different.
Now before anyone launches into “the team in front of him” takes… that was all dispelled, to me, by two things: the emergence of Joey Daccord and the changes to Grubauer’s game in season five. In season three (Joey’s first as a full time NHL goalie) and season four, the delta between Daccord’s performance and that of Grubauer’s is significant. I think Joey is an excellent goalie, but I have a hard time seeing him as an Igor Shesterkin – a guy who can put up great numbers in front of a terrible team. In a lot of hockey towns – Edmonton for instance – the goalie situation would be a front-and-center debate raging through the fanbase. Here in Seattle, however, that hasn’t been the case. Sure, there have plenty of “questions” and some “detractors”, but to me, it really seems like Grubauer has largely been given a pass. So much so that by the time he was sent down to Coachella, in season four, the excuse he wasn’t getting enough playing time was being bandied about. The fact that it took the front office over three-and-a-half seasons to actually do something about Grubauer is, to me, the most damning indictment of managements performance to date… and his results since bear out the argument.
I’m no goalie guru or even an astute observer, but I do have eyes and ears. I’ve gone over this many times so I’ll just briefly say, Grubauer changed his game, and it started in Coachella. Sure, the structure in front if him has improved, but there are still cross-seam passes, breakaways and blown assignments. What you do not see anymore, at all, is the “knee lift” before pushing across, the adventures halfway to the dots, or swimming facedown in the blue paint… all the staples of Gru’s game for almost four years. After Colin Zulianello got ahold of him with the Firebirds he came back up and those elements of his game were greatly diminished. Since the promotion of Zulianello to Seattle the following season, they’ve pretty much disappeared… and his performance improvement has been remarkable.
Now obviously, the goaltending was a real strength this past season and the final results were pretty much the same nonetheless. There is certainly a lot more to this teams struggles – the problem – than the netminders, but just like building a team starts on the backend, so does tearing it down… and the backend starts in net.
In season two the Kraken put up 100 points and made the playoffs in spite of the goaltending. Just about every skater had a career year and yet, the team’s .886 save percentage was the third worst in the league.
To me, a not insignificant amount of what the organization was trying to do was undermined by inferior goaltending. As I mentioned earlier, this isn’t some novel observation. Plenty of teams have suffered this. It’s also not an excuse. Management built the roster, including the goalies, and management let the problem fester for far too long.
Considering how “all over the place” this team has been in it’s first five seasons, obviously there’s more than just the goaltending to look at. I think this gets back to, why? Why is this the roster they have?…
Why is this the roster they have? Firstly, you have to disregard every draft pick made after Shane Wright. None of the players selected afterward could rightly be have been expected to contribute significantly to the teams results prior to the past season. Hell, Berkley Catton should not have been in the NHL at all, but the damned old CHL agreement meant either playing him in Seattle where he predictably got the piss beat out of him or completely wasting a year of his development in the juniors. Prior to Wright, the Kraken picked up two full-time NHL players in Matty Beniers and Ryker Evans, one of whom is, at the absolute worst, a solid 2C and the other is a top-four defenseman. That is pretty much it for the entry draft contributions, but it is not bad. It would have been nice to get more than what Eduard Sale has delivered so far, but that was a late-round first.
Then you have to consider the much-maligned expansion draft. More than anything else, this draft has shaped the roster up until now. Unlike the Vegas expansion draft, other teams had two years notice to prepare their protected list, and the difference was enormous. The players who were available were cap dumps, guys coming up on the last years of their deals, guys working through brutal injuries, and a handful of young guys with unrealized upside such as Vince Dunn, Jared McCann, and Joey Daccord. Ron Francis grabbed a lot of the guys from the last category and several guys on expiring contracts with the expectation of trading them, and, to his credit, he avoided taking a lot of cap dumps and injured guys. Why were there no trade deals during the draft? Because other teams had already made all the trades they needed to prepare for the expansion draft. They were set, and they knew that anyone they may want that the Kraken might pick would become available in the following off-season without sacrificing players or picks.
That brings us to free agency, which, as we all know now, is an NHL GM’s worst enemy. Every off-season,Seattle has taken swings on relatively high-profile free agents like Andre Burakovsky, Adam Larsson, Philipp Grubauer, Brandon Montour, and Chandler Stephenson. To say free agency has been a mixed bag on the ice is a massive understatement. You have pure, unadulterated wins like the Adam Larsson signing (you know that still stings the Oilers), catastrophic failures like the Andre Burakovsy acquisition (I still love the guy and wish him the best; I don’t know why he lost his mojo), and rollercoasters like Philipp Grubauer (extend this man!). Frankly, I do not know that we can rightly expect better from an institution like unrestricted free agency. It is a crap shoot at best, but at least the two Kraken GMs have never allowed free agency to put them in a cap crunch. There was, however, one big, stupid loss in free agency that has ended up mattering very much, that being allowing Morgan Geekie to walk. Goddamnit.
Trades have mostly been for futures with few players coming back, and none of them have been of the high-profile difference maker variety. That is until this past season when Bobby McMann decided, out of nowhere, to became a high-profile guy once he got here. Hoo-baby am I glad they were able to re-sign him. Up until Botterill took over, the Kraken seemingly never made an attempt to land high-end players in trades even though there had been quite a lot of big trades around the NHL during that time. If there is valid criticism of Ron Francis as a GM (if only he were still young enough to be our 1C) to be made, there it is. Jason Botterill, on the other hand, will willingly and eagerly back the Brinks truck up to a player’s house along with a pile of first-round picks for his soon-to-be-former team regardless of the fact that he could be shot down publicly and embarrassingly. I love it. Keep taking those shots, dude. Let the national media talk; Seattle sports fans could not care less about them.
Lots of good points there. I’ll be getting into the skaters and the evolution of the roster on my next installment of the way-too-long series titled, “Well Nino, here’s what I think the problem is”. Today was mainly just to point out the role the goaltending has played and how it effected their ability to pursue their objectives.
Your post overall was quite good until you get to Geekie. That REEKS of hindsight bias. Geekie wasn’t Geekie when we let him walk, in fact he wasn’t even Geekie when Boston picked him up. He only had 10 more pts the following season playing 5 more minutes a game. Geekie has even publicly said that. It took him a lot of offseason work with a new skills coach to finally achieve.
Building the roster. After touching on the challenges in goal, it’s now on to the skaters and “why” this is the roster they have.
Draft and develop… I think everyone agrees that’s “the plan”. I recognize some folks think they don’t have a plan and other folks think draft and develop isn’t a plan unless you’re picking in the top five… fair enough. They don’t have a plan, that’s the problem, it’s that simple. For anyone who believes just maybe they have “a plan” or strategy, I’m gonna say draft and develop seems like the idea. This is very “basic”, but ultimately I don’t think you can do a critical analysis here without starting at the strategic level.
So this kind of goes back to where I started. I think draft and develop has been the plan. At the same time, they’re not in a position to tank, so pushing for the playoffs has also been a priority. In my last “installment” I identified the goaltending as a real impediment to making the playoffs, but I think they’ve maintained their overall strategy. As much as folks have bemoaned the veteran contracts – both UFAs and extensions – the Kraken aren’t pinned down by any of these. I don’t think this is by accident.
As I mentioned a while back, the financial catastrophe of the Stephenson contract is already an afterthought. I do think, however, there is something else about them signing Stephenson I believe is misunderstood, and I mentioned this as well. I think signing Stephenson was and effort to serve both priorities: develop their young centers AND make the playoffs. I do not believe for one second they considered it some “all in effort” to make a leap to contender status. I don’t believe he was ever signed to be a legit No.1 center. He wasn’t paid like he was and, to me, the bulk of the confusion around the signing was the fans and the media trailing the market. Somehow, folks got the idea the Kraken thought they were making some “all in” move by “overpaying” huge money for a guy they considered the final piece. The fact they said almost nothing to refute this idea didn’t help. To me, the Stephenson contract was nothing more than a waypoint on the path plotted out towards drafting and developing and pushing for the playoffs. It was never a “loss of direction” or “change of course”.
And then there’s making the playoffs. This is another one where I think the reality is a little different than some of the perceptions out there. Not too long ago Elliott Friedman had a take on the Kraken making the playoffs in season two I thought was rather typical. He doesn’t say a lot about Seattle, but usually I think he’s a bit more insightful than most and definitely more pragmatic. On this occasion, however, it felt like he just went with the narrative. Making the playoffs in season two (to paraphrase) set the Kraken back because it made them think they were closer than they were. Now, this sounds plausible enough, but to me, a couple things don’t add up. After a strong first half and an historic January (longest road trip sweep in NHL history) at the trade deadline Ron Francis doesn’t do anything. Even though they’d lost their leading scorer to injury, Andre Burakovsky, the Kraken went out and added absolutely nothing. And then, after knocking off the defending Stanley Cup Champions and pushing a very strong Stars squad to seven games, they go all in by… letting their fourth line walk along with Carson Soucy so they can sign Kailer Yamamoto, Pierre-Edouard Bellemare, Devin Shore and Brian Dumoulin? Do those sound like the moves of a team that thinks they’re close? For all of the complaints, it seems pretty clear to me Ron Francis did not think the team was “closer than they were”. It sounds, to me, more like someone who’s patiently sticking with a plan. It wasn’t until after the demise of Dave Hakstol and the departure of Alex Wennberg the following season that they added Stephenson (and Montour).
I’ve touched on these two points here because I think “draft and develop” is a long and continuous process. I also believe a lot of folks think these are examples of where they’ve departed from that and to many it feels aimless… without a plan. Everyone bemoans the “mushy middle”, myself included, but if you can’t tank, what’s the alternative? Making the playoffs. I think they have a difficult challenge, but I believe them when they say the goal every season is to make the playoffs. I think their ultimate strategy is to get to sustained playoff success through drafting and developing. I don’t believe they “don’t know what they’re doing” or don’t recognize their own roster.
And about that roster… the one without any elite talent. Why re-sign “old middle-sixers” and “aging d-men” when what you need is a “superstar”?…
A superstar… that’s what they’re missing. Why didn’t Ron Francis get them one?
I’ve already explored why they haven’t been able to do this through the draft… no luck, no suck. Free agency hasn’t been a place to acquire elite players for quite some time. The only real option that’s been available to them would’ve been through trade… so why haven’t they done that?
There was no elite talent available through the expansion draft, trade or otherwise, period. Since then some of these players have been available – Jack Eichel for instance. It’s been five years, why?
As we’ve seen lately, elite players have a lot of control over where they go and Seattle hasn’t been a “destination”. Following up season two with another trip to the playoffs might have changed that, but that obviously didn’t happen. While this is an important factor here, I think there is something more significant to consider. How would a trade of that magnitude fit in with the organizations strategy? If they have a plan and are following a strategy rather than just showing up at the office and “reacting”, they would need to consider several dimensions of a trade – assets, time, intangibles. There is nothing insightful about saying they need star power. Exploring how – and when – they go about making that happen within the constraints of a strategy may be more telling.
If we accept the idea of a “draft and develop” strategy, it’s difficult to see how in their first four seasons the Kraken would have had enough capital to pursue that strategy while simultaneously trading for a “star” player. Even though the Kraken accumulated a considerable stock of draft picks following expansion, the caliber of the picks would not have facilitated a significant trade without having to sacrifice their few “premium” assets, an effort completely at odds with their strategy. Furthermore, D&D takes time and the utility of stripping assets to add a player that doesn’t coordinate with the timeline seems like poor execution.
But why do they keep bringing back these old guys? So far the Kraken have iced 60 different skaters and four goaltenders who have appeared in double-digit NHL games for Seattle. From the original expansion draft they have just Vince Dunn, Adam Larsson, Jordan Eberle, Jared McCann and Joey Daccord. They also signed Philip Grubauer as a UFA. Are these guys the problem? I already discussed Gru, but in my opinion – and contrary to others – these guys aren’t blocking anyone from opportunities. This group actually sounds like the sort of quality veterans that most D&D teams seem to want to expose their young guys to. As the new players are integrated and develop, I fully expect the organization to continue rotating these players out. The same way they moved out fan favorites Yanni Gourde and Brandon Tanev and many others.
And now… as the young players mature and the old players age out, now maybe the timing and the assets are better suited to adding “top end” talent. As we’ve been seeing lately, easier said than done.
So 5000 words later….
Ugh! I really didn’t want to drone on like this but once I started, it really seemed necessary – at least for me – to dive into some of these particulars. Sorting through a lot of this has clarified things a bit for me. I can also see where there is plenty in here to debate, and so folks with honest opinions and differing analysis can certainly disagree. I would hope for some specifics and examples in those debates and there are folks on here who disagree with me and provide both of those… thanks for that.
So I started with the idea the Kraken set out to build their team through drafting and developing and I think their actions, going back to the expansion draft, have been consistent with this all along. At the same time they prioritized making the playoffs. While these two dynamics seem at odds with a traditional “rebuild”, the Kraken haven’t been in a traditional situation. They have been tasked with “building” HOCKEY – not just a team – in Seattle. Given this, I think it’s understandable they didn’t take a “scorched earth” approach and go full tank.
As I pointed out, I think Ron Francis did a poor job of communicating the Kraken vision. I believe anyone from SoundOfHockey.com – that’s SoundOfHockey….. .com – will tell you Francis was known to say little, and what little he said, typically said nothing. I think that is the number one reason so many fans and media think of the organization as lacking direction.
Certainly they have made mistakes along the way – all teams do – but I think they’ve been strategically consistent. Even after making the playoffs, they didn’t make an ill advised push to “take a step”. The Stephenson and Montour signing came later and did not cost them prospects or upend their cap. As I argued, I think those signings were misread by a lot folks as “big swings” rather than strategic efforts to serve their twin objectives… but again, not communicated.
I think the roster construction has been fine considering the constraints they’ve been under. There hasn’t been an opportunity, I think, to add an “elite” player and the draft hasn’t provided one as of yet. They’ve moved players in and out and there’s been good and bad there as well. Morgan Geekie has been thriving in Boston, but other players like Yanni Gourde, Oliver Bjorkstrand and Brandon Tanev have all struggled elsewhere and their asset returns have been quite favorable. Tanev, for example, led the league in $/P (dollars per point) last season at $833k a point, a dubious distinction.
So the “problem”. To me the question is more directly about why they haven’t met their own objectives. This is assuming this “twin strategy” of draft and develop and make the playoffs. I do think this is the “plan” and I think it’s consistent with the Kraken’s actions. I also think it’s in line with what they’ve communicated, unfortunately, I do not think their message has been delivered in a cohesive and open manner. Even with the departure of Francis, I think this is still an issue as was demonstrated with the “gobbledygook” that came out at the end of the season and the follow up with this whole “audit”.
As I mentioned with the drafting and developing, as far as I can reasonably observe, their drafting has been fine and their development has been fine. Like the audit said, there’s room for improvement with more support personnel on the development side. The biggest challenge on this front, however, is the amount of time it takes. If you’ve concluded the Kraken have already failed at developing their players, I think you have an unrealistic expectation of the timeline and results. I think their failure to make the playoffs is another issue.
I already indicated I think the goaltending has contributed to this, but I also think there has been a lack of identity and direction. I don’t know if this is the coaching, the players, management or just voodoo, but this team has seemingly whipsawed from solid play to complete catastrophe during each of the last three seasons. I’m not saying they’ve ever looked like a contender, but they’ve certainly looked like a team that could make the playoffs, and they’ve also looked hapless. This, to me, is a problem… and part of “the problem”.
To me the problem, like the strategy, is two fold. Drafting and developing takes time. That’s the first “problem”. Second, the only constant with this team has been inconsistency. The first season – hey it’s the first season, what did you expect. The second season – flying to the puck and giving teams hell on the forecheck, playoffs. The third season – they can’t handle or pass the puck and the more they try and shoot, the more they lose. The fourth season – a new coach wants to make em a rush team, but they can’t get out of their own end. Last season – best start in franchise history and 3rd in the Division at the Olympic break, tied with the Almighty Ducks… and then apparently they used a week of practice to focus on collapsing. It feels like it’s come from the management, from the coaching staff and from the players. I honestly think they have had rosters that, especially in the Pacific, could have made the playoffs each of the last four seasons. The players frequently seeming to “not show up” for games is aggravating but I think specifically, the constant changes of the coaches and FROM the coaches have contributed significantly.
So… I think the “inconsistency” in the organization – top to bottom, ownership to players – has been a problem. I think it’s been the biggest barrier to making the playoffs which is an important part of their strategy. Without being “playoff competitive”, they’re going to have a hard time attracting “premium” players.
The inconsistency problem has, to some degree, been offset by the premium they’ve received in draft position. I think this circles back to THE PROBLEM…
Drafting and developing – it takes time to build a successful organization and fans are impatient. I think a lot of folks take simplistic views – myself included – about the dynamics involved in not just operating a complex organization, but doing it in a competitive environment. I also think most folks aren’t interested in trying to actually understand the teams approach. Rather, they’re more interested in lamenting the teams failure to follow what they considered to be the “path to success”. Plans that are, by nature, built on limited information.
I’m sure I’m on an island here, but I’m encouraged by the direction the team is moving. I’ve been saying for a couple seasons, next year (26/27) should be where things start to turn. The departure of vets has left plenty of cap and roster space for a group of prospects that are only now beginning to be ready take steps or earn playing time… and there are more on the way. I still think they have the will and the means to pull off something significant this offseason and the Pacific is, I believe, still weak.
If their “plan” is something resembling my estimation, next season should be, to me, the crux of the Kraken’s efforts.
Go Kraken!!!