The Olympic break roster freeze is officially over, and the NHL has snapped back into trade deadline mode. Between now and March 6, every front office will be asking the same question: Who are we, really? And for the Kraken, a team that has spent most of the season hovering around the playoff bubble, the answer isn’t as straightforward as it is for others.
That’s what makes this deadline so compelling. Seattle isn’t locked into any one lane. Depending on the plan, they can justify almost any approach, with some paths more realistic than others. And because the conversation usually collapses into the oversimplified “buy or sell,” it’s worth laying out the full menu of strategies NHL teams actually use this time of year.
Here’s what’s on the table, with real examples and a little Kraken-specific seasoning.
The big swing
This is for teams that want to push their chips in and win a Stanley Cup now. This category includes both the classic “full buyer” approach and the rare, seismic deadline blockbuster that shakes the league.
Examples:
- Dallas Stars (2025): Acquired Mikko Rantanen from the Hurricanes for Logan Stankoven, two first-round picks, and two third-round picks. Result: Lost in the Conference Finals to the Oilers.
- Vegas Golden Knights (2024): Added Tomas Hertl and Noah Hanifin for two firsts, a third, and depth prospects. Lost in the first round, but both players remain long-term pieces.
- Tampa Bay Lightning (2023): Acquired Tanner Jeannot from Nashville for Cal Foote and five draft picks. Result: Lost in the first round to Toronto.
- Toronto Maple Leafs (2023): Added Erik Gustafsson, Jake McCabe, Sam Lafferty, Ryan O’Reilly, and Noel Acciari across three trades for Rasmus Sandin and multiple picks. Won a round, then fell to Florida.
Kraken angle: Very unlikely. Seattle hasn’t reached the “push the chips in” phase of the franchise. A blockbuster only makes sense if it involves a player with several years of term beyond 2025–26, and that might be a deal they try to swing over the summer.
Targeted buyer
This is the “we’re good, but let’s not tweak too much” approach. You’re improving the roster without lighting your future on fire. Usually there’s a specific role or depth need, but these moves don’t get the headlines of a big swing.
Examples:
- Winnipeg Jets (2025): Added Brandon Tanev and Luke Schenn for second-round picks. Won a round, then lost to Dallas.
- Florida Panthers (2024): Acquired Vladimir Tarasenko for a third and a fourth. Won the Stanley Cup.
- Dallas Stars (2023): Added Max Domi and Evgenii Dadonov for a second and Denis Gurianov. Reached the Conference Finals.
Kraken angle: Unlikely. With the team finally healthy, the Kraken have an abundance of depth, which makes this scenario less likely. Their needs lean more toward high-end talent, and that usually requires significant assets.
Stay the course
Sometimes the best move is no move. Sometimes the best move is getting a key player back from injury. Sometimes the best move is solving your depth issues with internal resources. Plenty of teams have taken this path and lived to tell the tale.
Examples:
- Montreal Canadiens (2025): Did nothing at the deadline, made the playoffs, then lost to Washington in Round 1.
- Boston Bruins (2024): Made two small depth trades, finished second in the Atlantic, beat Toronto, then lost to Florida.
- Seattle Kraken (2023): Stood pat, then beat Colorado in seven games before falling to Dallas in seven.
Kraken angle: Likely. It’s not exciting, but it’s probably the most likely scenario. The Kraken are in a playoff spot and playing their best hockey of the season, but it’s hard to argue they’re a true Cup contender. Keeping their expiring contracts may simply be the strategy.
Soft seller
You’re not rebuilding, but you recognize the long odds of contending for the Cup. You have players on expiring contracts who could fetch a nice return, and you’re willing to listen.
Examples:
- Washington Capitals (2024): Shed Evgeny Kuznetsov, Joel Edmundson, and Anthony Mantha while seven points out of a playoff spot. Still made the playoffs, then were swept by the Rangers. Playing it conservative enabled them for a busy summer of retooling by acquiring Pierre-Luc Dubois, Andrew Mangiapane, Logan Thompson, and Jakob Chychrun in four different trades.
- Pittsburgh Penguins (2024): Moved Jake Guentzel and little else. Despite calls to tear it down, the core stayed intact. Now, the Penguins are surprisingly back in a playoff spot with that same core.
Kraken angle: Possible. The Kraken have four players on expiring contracts: Jaden Schwartz, Jordan Eberle, Eeli Tolvanen, and Jamie Oleksiak. All have contributed, but the Kraken also have enough depth to backfill if another team makes an offer they can’t refuse. With Ben Meyers and Berkly Catton set to return from injured reserve, a trade could solve a roster crunch while bringing back a meaningful asset. It also seems like current Coachella Valley Firebirds Logan Morrison and Jani Nyman could help backfill any forward departures, while Seattle is carrying two extra defensemen in Cale Fleury and Josh Mahura.
Tear it down
A tear it down approach isn’t really a trade deadline strategy — it’s a multi-year plan for a team with little to no path to competitiveness. Full rebuilds are less common now, since there’s no guarantee they work. But a major deadline offload can signal the start (or continuation) of one.
Example:
- Boston Bruins (2025): On the outside of the playoff picture, they moved Brad Marchand, Brandon Carlo, Charlie Coyle, Justin Brazeau, and Trent Frederic. One year later, they’re holding down the last wild card spot with a very different roster.
Kraken angle: Very unlikely. Seattle has a healthy amount of young talent in the NHL and in the pipeline, plus plenty of early-round picks in the coming drafts. A major teardown at the deadline makes little sense.
What should the Kraken do?
With the Kraken in the playoff hunt and several players on expiring contracts, they have multiple paths available. It’s unlikely they’ll be a major player at the deadline, but if an opportunity arises to add an impact player with term, they’ll be in the mix. They also have pieces that could help any playoff team, along with prospects and picks that rebuilding clubs covet.
They have options, but staying relatively quiet might be the most realistic outcome.
So what’s your take? If you were Seattle Kraken general manager Jason Botterill, which lane would you choose, and how bold would you be as the deadline approaches?
We already have our “stars.” Beniers, Catton, Wright, Kakko, Evans and likely O’Brien. They are just young and still developing (not everyone can be Celebrini). Short term playoff runs are extremely valuable but not critical. The question is what experienced players (27-ish to 36+) can you get to ice an actual NHL team and aid in the development of your future, and are any of Montour, Eberle, Schwartz, McCann, Stephenson, Larsson, Oleksiak, Lindgren, Gaudreau and Grubauer not up to the task? Who would you try to change and who is available to get instead? Will the new player actually be better for your team? Could giving up one of those players hurt your team? I wouldn’t have any issue helping Oleksiak find a new home and playing Mahura, for example. Outside of that, I don’t know that I would replace any of our current “vets”, especially given how well this very young team is performing.
I get the point you’re trying to make, but I don’t think that’s a very realistic description of what this team is. This isn’t a “very young team”, its slightly above average in terms of age. We’re starting to see more young players work their way up and into the rotation, but on a given night there are maybe 6 of the 19 guys on the ice that you could still call young players.
You also can’t in good faith list all of those young players as stars, the closest thing to a star player on this roster is Jared McCann. I still think Matty can continue to climb and get there. We’re hopeful that one of Wright or Catton can break out into a bona fide top liner. Evans looks like he has top 4 potential, but not a star. Kakko is young enough to get better, but he’s 25 and has never at any point in his career looked like a star player. O’Brien isn’t going to be a full time NHL player for at least 2 years. Again, I agree with your point that there is more long term value in letting the younger players mature and develop than trading any away for a quick fix (unless a guy like Jason Roberston is really available), but we also have to look at our own roster with more honest eyes.
It is a very young team. The average age doesn’t matter because two guys throw it off a little. Eberle and Grubauer. Otherwise, you have Beniers, Wright, Catton, Evans, Winterton, Melanson, Kakko and Kartye all on the roster. That’s 8 guys 24 or under, and the player you seem to be calling up is Mølgaard, who is also well under 24. That’s a young NHL team no matter how you look at it.
Those young players are our “stars” whether you like it or not. Who else are you getting, if not the two guys you drafted at 2 and 4, two guys you drafted at 8, a guy you traded for who was picked at 2 and Evans was who is showing every sign of being a fixture in the NHL for the next 15 years? Other people might like to entertain fantasy, but I live in reality.
I think the fact that stars was in quotes shouldn’t be overlooked here.
I’m still in on “the big swing”. One thing with the Rantanen trade is it was conditioned on him signing a long-term contract. I know there aren’t a lot – or any – pending UFA stars or even pending RFAs. I think Robertson isn’t actually available and even if he is it’s going to be in the offseason. The Blues on the other hand do reportedly have a couple premium player that may be available who could fit nicely with the Kraken and are under contract long-term at a reasonable price. I think Friedman said the ask on Thomas was the equivalent of four firsts. I’d do Wright, both Lightning firsts and Sale for Thomas in a second, but I don’t think those are the four firsts the Blues would have in mind. That said, I think the Kraken are in a good position to be in on either of those guys if they move. If they do a “big swing”, it can’t be a rental.
Go Kraken!!!
Agree on Robertson. The Stars projected cap space for 26/27 is (just enough) to sign him next season to your generic goal-scorer $11mm-$13mm contract, and Dallas’ cap situation will better still in 27/28. Hard to believe Dallas would let him leave, particularly in a conference team where Colorado, Minnesota, Utah and the ubiquitous LVG have been aggressively acquired star talent, and teams like SJ and Anaheim have emerging rosters. It would be the hockey equivalent of “unilateral disarmament.”
Robert Thomas makes sense, but (like a lot of potential targets) has a NTC. It could be a really hard sell for RF and JB to convince players to commit long-term to a franchise where several key players ( goal scorers and defensemen) are aging – 34+ next season – or upcoming FAs (or both). Kraken and TB’s draft picks will be mid – very late 1st round, so maybe not a lot of currency there. Any move they make could require “uncomfortable” moves like parting with younger players like Catton and/or O’Brien. None of their other prospects have any real trade value I think.
I’d like to see them be buyers of talent that can help them for at least 2-3 years but sadly I expect them to make more shortsighted buy moves to boost the roster for this year. Hopefully the only thing we lose is draft picks and not young talent.
Other than Montour and Stephenson signings there’s been zero shortsighted moves and those were both signings and not trades. People seem to just want to be mad
The Kraken have never been buyers at the deadline. Even in season 2 they just held steady. I dont think that changes this year unless they can some how pull away a star player who either has term or can be extended long term and that seems unlikely given how many teams are on the bubble. If that is going to happen it is more likely going to be during the offseason. I think trading Wright at this time would be selling low given his age and the flashes he shows at times. I keep hoping that finding him the right pairings with more minutes might unlock something in his game and it is worth being patient with him.
I may be one of the few hoping for this but I hope they sign Eberle to a 2 year extension. He continues to produce, seems to be a steadying influence, and brings veteran leadership to the team. I also would like them to resign Tolvenan because he is kind of a Freddy G. in that he can play up and down the line-up a bit and fits in both the PP/PK if needed. Plus he is young, healthy, and plays a physical game despite not being a huge guy.
That leaves Oleksiak and Schwartz as our Pending UFA’s. Oleksiak has played well this year, but he has the frame and game that teams seem to overpay for every year at the deadline. Given we both Fleury and Mahura have shown they are both very capable 3rd pair D, i feel comfortable shopping Oleksiak and trading him away if we could get something like a 1st or 2nd + 4th for him or even a well regarded prospect. Schwartz is a good middle six guy who tons of teams would want, but he has had injuries this year (and a history of them) so not sure if teams would be willing to give up much for him with that risk hanging over him. Trading him would give opportunity for some of the younger guys to step up and get some more playing time.