After digging into Lane Lambert’s impact on Kraken goal scoring in my last piece, I couldn’t shake the feeling that there was still more research to look at or areas to explore. Goal scoring tells part of the story, but it doesn’t tell us how teams are generating their chances. In this follow-up piece, I’m zooming in on shot quality: high‑danger, medium‑danger, and low‑danger attempts across Lambert’s coaching tenures, plus a look at expected goals to see whether the underlying process matches the results. If the first article raised good questions, this one aims to push a little deeper into the answers.
In that first piece, I looked at whether Lambert’s system might be suppressing Kraken goal scoring. The short version: the picture wasn’t nearly as straightforward as the raw totals suggested. Yes, Seattle’s scoring dipped in Lambert’s first season, and yes, several players saw their production slide. But when I compared his Kraken tenure to his time with the Islanders, and to the coaches who came before and after him, the results were mixed.
Lambert’s Islanders actually scored more than Barry Trotz’s and nearly as much as Patrick Roy’s, and individual player trends didn’t point to a consistent pattern either. The broader takeaway was that Seattle’s scoring struggles likely stem from a blend of roster construction, usage, and variance rather than a system that inherently throttles offense. That left one big question on the table: if the goals dried up, what was happening underneath the surface in terms of shot quality and expected goals?
Shot quality and expected goals primer
Before we get too deep into the weeds, it’s worth laying out why shot quality matters, and offering a quick primer for anyone who doesn’t spend time dabbling in the dark arts of hockey analytics. Not all shots are created equal. A wrist shot from the point with no traffic is not the same as a backdoor tap‑in rebound, and analytics try to capture that difference by categorizing attempts into high‑danger, medium‑danger, and low‑danger areas. High‑danger chances come from the slot and net‑front, where shooting percentages spike. Medium‑danger chances live in the middle of the ice, and low‑danger attempts are typically perimeter shots with a low probability of beating an NHL goalie.
Expected‑goals (xG) models take all of this into account: location, shot type, and timing relative to other events, to estimate how likely a shot was to become a goal. For this exercise, all shot‑quality and xG data comes from NaturalStatTrick.com, one of the most widely used public analytics sites in hockey. If the first article focused on what happened to Kraken scoring under Lambert, this section is about understanding how those chances were generated in the first place. To illustrate the value of high‑, medium‑, and low‑danger shots, take a look at the shooting percentages across those three categories.
Shortcomings of public models
It’s also worth acknowledging the limitations of the public shot‑quality and expected‑goals models used here. Sites like NaturalStatTrick do incredible work with the data they have, but that data is inherently limited. Public models only track a handful of events: shot attempts, their location on the ice, and timing relative to other recorded events.
What they don’t capture is often just as important: passing sequences, pre‑shot movement, traffic in front of the net, screens, odd‑man rushes, defensive breakdowns, or where the other nine skaters are positioned when the shot occurs. All of those factors meaningfully influence scoring probability, but they’re invisible to public datasets. So while these models give us a useful directional understanding of shot quality, they’re not a perfect representation of what happens on the ice.
High‑Danger chance rate per game
Let’s start with high‑danger chances per game for both the Islanders and Kraken across coaching tenures.
The trends look similar to the goal‑scoring analysis from last week’s Data Dump. Across both teams, the tenure with the most high‑danger chances per game was Lambert’s time with the Islanders, and the tenure with the fewest was Lambert’s time (so far) with the Kraken. That contrast is interesting and a reminder that context matters.
Medium‑danger chance rate per game
Now let’s take a look at medium‑danger chances per game.
The pattern is similar to high‑danger chances, with one notable difference: the drop from Bylsma to Lambert is smaller here than it was in the high‑danger category.
Because the impact is so minimal, I’m skipping a deep dive into low‑danger chances.
Putting it together with expected goals
Continuing with NaturalStatTrick data, here’s the expected goals per game by coaching tenure.
Seeing Lambert’s Kraken tenure produce the highest expected goals per game is a little surprising, which makes me theorize that the 2025–26 team was unlucky, or that the prior four seasons were a little lucky. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
For the heck of it, let’s also look at average goals per game by season versus expected goals per game by season.
Truth be told, it’s not as simple as “lucky” or “unlucky,” but the public models do suggest the Kraken deserved more goals than they scored under Lambert last season.
What we learned
I am not sure we gained any additional insight with this additional analysis. What we did get was a baseline: Lambert’s Kraken generated enough expected goals to deserve more than they got, but they also produced the fewest high-danger chances in the league. That’s a tough combo. Call it unlucky, call it unsustainable, call it whatever you want, but if the Kraken want to score more this season, they’ll need to spend a lot less time on the perimeter and a lot more time in the places where goals are actually scored.
Aside from a shooting‑percentage bender in 2022–23, the Seattle Kraken haven’t exactly been known as a high‑scoring team. But last season’s offensive output felt particularly challenging. Lane Lambert arrived with a reputation for structure and defensive responsibility, and the Kraken have certainly leaned into that identity. Now that we have a full season of Lambert hockey to look at, it feels fair to ask how much his coaching impacted the team’s goal scoring.
There are a few questions I want to explore: how did Lambert’s teams score before and after his tenure with the Islanders? How does Kraken scoring compare across their three coaches? And what happens to individual players’ goal rates when they play for Lambert? Maybe we’ll find a pattern. Maybe we’ll find nothing at all. Either way, these are the questions worth poking at.
As always, there are caveats and known limitations baked into this kind of analysis. For starters, this is a high‑level, simplified approach to measuring offensive impact. I might expand on shots, shooting percentage, and shot attempts, but even then we’ll be missing a lot of contextual factors. One obvious example: teams playing with a lead in the third period tend to score less because there’s no urgency to push offense. Over the first two months of the 2025–26 season, Lambert’s Kraken looked perfectly content prioritizing defensive structure over offensive generation in third periods.
Another caveat is personnel changes from season to season and coach to coach, whether through injuries or roster turnover. I’ll call out some of those changes as we move through the exploration.
Lambert’s Islanders tenure
Lane Lambert was named head coach of the New York Islanders in the summer of 2022 and lasted roughly a season and a half before being let go on Jan. 20, 2024. He finished with a 61‑46‑20 record and guided the team back to the Stanley Cup Playoffs in his first season. With the Islanders, we can compare both his predecessor, Barry Trotz, and his successor, Patrick Roy.
It’s a little surprising to see Lambert’s Islanders posting the highest average goals‑for per game of the three coaches, especially considering the scoring dip we saw in Seattle. Breaking it down by season gives us a bit more context.
When Roy took over mid‑season in 2023–24, he squeezed out an additional 0.12 goals per game from the same roster. That’s not a huge bump, but it’s enough to swing a couple of standings points. For fun, let’s also look at shots on goal per game and shooting percentage.
Again, nothing materially different between the three coaching tenures.
Islanders roster changes and player production
To paint a fuller picture, here are some of the more notable roster changes across the three regimes:
Trotz → Lambert subtrations: The biggest offensive subtraction was Jordan Eberle, who left a season before Lambert arrived. Eberle had been one of the Islanders’ top scorers before being selected by Seattle in the Expansion Draft.
Additions under Lambert: Bo Horvat joined mid‑season in Lambert’s first year. Pierre Engvall, Hudson Fasching, and Simon Holmstrom also arrived — serviceable forwards, but not major offensive drivers.
Lambert → Roy subtractions: Zach Parise and Anthony Beauvillier played portions of Lambert’s tenure but not Roy’s.
Roy additions: Anthony Duclair, Tony DeAngelo, Emil Heineman, and Matthew Schaeffer all contributed offensively under Roy but not Lambert.
Here’s how goals per game shook out for players who overlapped at least two of the three tenures. (Red = higher goal rate; blue = lower.)
There’s nothing particularly significant here, with the possible exception of Brock Nelson, who scored roughly 0.06 more goals per game under Lambert than under either Trotz or Roy, about five extra goals over a full season.
The Kraken’s three‑coach history
As mentioned above, there’s no denying the Kraken struggled to score last season. They averaged 2.73 goals per game — 28th in the league — down from 2.99 under Dan Bylsma in 2024–25. That was the sixth‑biggest drop in the NHL.
We already know the offensive decline from Bylsma to Lambert was steep, but zooming out to include the Hakstol era gives us more information.
The drop from Bylsma to Lambert was significant but still better than the non‑playoff Hakstol years. The falloff from 2022–23 to 2023–24 was also substantial, but the roster got noticeably worse over that span. Pierre‑Edouard Bellemare and Kailer Yamamoto were expected to replace the 44 goals lost from Ryan Donato (14), Morgan Geekie (9), and Daniel Sprong (21).
Now let’s look at shots on goal and shooting percentage by coach.
One insight to consider might be the relatively low shot volume under Lambert compared to previous coaches. But when Lambert coached the Islanders, they had the highest shot volume of the three tenures. And again, shot volume is tricky; teams shoot less when they’re winning, and that’s exactly what we saw early in 2025–26.
To illustrate the point, here’s a breakdown of average shots on goal in 10‑game increments with win percentage in those 10 games noted at the bottom of each bar. In three of their coldest stretches (shown in blue), they actually averaged their highest shot totals.
Kraken roster changes and player production
As with the Islanders, here are the notable roster changes across Kraken coaches:
Hakstol → Bylsma subtractions: Alex Wennberg, Ryan Donato, and Morgan Geekie were the biggest offensive losses.
Additions under Bylsma: Chandler Stephenson, Brandon Montour, and half a season of Kaapo Kakko.
Bylsma → Lambert subtractions: Oliver Bjorkstrand, Andre Burakovsky, and Yanni Gourde were all traded before Lambert arrived.
Additions under Lambert: Mason Marchment (29 games before being traded), Freddy Gaudreau, and rookie Berkly Catton.
Here are the average goals per game for players who played significant minutes under two or more coaches.
Vince Dunn, Brandon Montour, Jaden Schwartz, Eeli Tolvanen, and Shane Wright all saw their goal production dip under Lambert, while Jordan Eberle and Jared McCann saw increases. To really understand the root causes, we’d need to dig into ice time, power‑play usage, and shot rates and that is beyond the scope of this analysis (for now).
The Lambert scoring impact
After walking through all of this, I’m not convinced we can pin the Kraken’s scoring issues squarely on Lane Lambert’s systems. The numbers just don’t support a clean, tidy narrative. Yes, Seattle’s goal scoring dipped in his first season, and yes, several individual players saw their production slide. But Lambert’s Islanders teams didn’t show the same pattern, and in some cases even scored more under his watch. That inconsistency suggests the Kraken’s offensive struggles are likely a blend of system, roster construction, usage, and plain old variance, not a single, coach‑driven cause.
If anything, the broader takeaway is that the Kraken have been living on the edge of their offensive talent pool for a while now. When the roster thins, the scoring dries up. When the roster deepens, the scoring rebounds. Lambert’s structure may tighten the margins, but it doesn’t appear to inherently suppress offense the way some feared. That gives at least a little hope that the 2025–26 scoring woes aren’t permanent fixtures of the Lambert era.
The more interesting question might be what happens next. With Mackie Samoskevich arriving, Bobby McMann stepping into a full season, and Berkly Catton entering his sophomore year, the Kraken have a few upward‑trending pieces who can tilt the ice offensively. If those players hit, and if Lambert’s system continues to stabilize the defensive side of the puck, Seattle could find a healthier balance, one where structure doesn’t come at the expense of scoring.
The system isn’t the ceiling, and the Kraken’s offensive future probably depends more on who’s wearing the sweaters than who’s standing behind the bench.
It’s fair to say this offseason has so far felt underwhelming for the Seattle Kraken. An offseason headlined Jason Robertson denying a trade to Seattle, with only small tweaking to the roster, hasn’t exactly instilled confidence that things will be much different heading into Opening Night.
Now that we’re deep into the summer, the window for the Kraken to acquire any big fish this offseason seems all but shut. However, there is still an intriguing possibility out there.
The Columbus Blue Jackets and 21-year-old center Adam Fantilli, as of now, have not officially reached an extension. While it seems a deal with the restricted free agent will ultimately get done, according to Adam Portzline of The Athletic, this amount of waiting has left many to wonder how Fantilli’s future will look.
Aaron Portzline: Re Adam Fantilli extension/Blue Jackets: I think it's gonna be a five year deal and I would put it somewhere between 13 and 14 [million] – Oilers Now (7/24)
— NHL Rumour Report (@NHLRumourReport) July 28, 2026
If this were a year or two ago, it would have been hard to envision a scenario where Fantilli could be pried away. But this is a new era. If the Leo Carlsson offer sheet by Philadelphia taught us anything, it’s that there’s always a price.
Fantilli is reportedly seeking a deal that gets into the same realm as his 2023 NHL Draft counterparts, with Carlsson having signed for $18 million over five years, and Connor Bedard for $15 million over the same term.
If the figure is $15 million, only three teams currently have the cap space to even give that to Fantilli: Detroit, Vancouver and… Seattle.
With the clock ticking for the Kraken to make this offseason more “prolific” as promised, luring away Fantilli could be one of the few avenues left to deliver that.
While the cost to acquire him would likely end up being too high for the Kraken to stomach, it’s still fun to think about what it would take to bring in the potential young star Seattle has been seeking. So, let’s entertain the idea for a few minutes. Here are the risks and rewards of a Kraken offer sheet for Adam Fantilli.
The risks: The costs would be insane
With Columbus’ current cap situation, it’s still a challenge to get Fantilli signed to a reasonable number without some financial gymnastics. The fact that he has remained unsigned this far into the offseason has raised alarm bells across the league, and the Kraken are definitely one of the teams that could use his services.
Estimates for a Fantilli extension have him earning around $13-14 million AAV. Columbus has a projected $14.5 million in cap space after extending Jet Greaves and Cole Sillinger. So, they can afford him if he signs in that area, but that all but maxes them out.
This is where Seattle could come in, offering an amount that would put the Blue Jackets over the cap, assuming they were to match.
If the Kraken offered a deal similar to the one they were reportedly willing to give Jason Robertson — $15 million per season — it would leave them with roughly $3 million in cap space for the coming year. Similar to Carlsson’s contract, much of that money would likely have to come in the form of signing bonuses.
But there’s a reason why offer sheets rarely ever happen: they aren’t cheap. In addition to the dollar amount on the contract, the Kraken would also have to pay a hefty draft-capital price — four first-round picks over the next four drafts.
Plus, it’s not like Fantilli is a completely finished product. He is still developing. Considering how things have gone with Shane Wright, Matty Beniers, and Berkly Catton, it’s hard to believe expectations for immediate production would be any different.
Plus, Seattle and Columbus seem to be in similar situations right now, and even with the right offer, Fantilli would still have to choose the Kraken if an offer sheet became a reality.
The Kraken would likely have to oversell both the market and the organization’s vision, something that has proven to be a tall task considering what happened with previous pursuits of stars over the last few months.
The reward: A renewed offense
But what if it works?
Even though he’s only 21 years old, Fantilli would immediately become one of the faces of the franchise and a centerpiece of the next decade of Kraken hockey. He brings a multidimensional approach to creating offense and attacking defenders.
He would have led the Kraken in assists, points, and shots on goal in 2025-26, while finishing second in goals. Having a shoot-first mentality like his would help to electrify the offense as a whole.
Seattle needs a boost in its collective offense again. They have ranked in the NHL’s bottom five in expected goals for over the past two seasons. Fantilli is the type of player who could provide sustained offensive pressure for years to come.
It’s worth noting too that he also shares the same agent as Beniers, Catton, and Freddie Gaudreau in Pat Brisson of CAA Sports.
Conclusion: Too big a risk
While it’s enticing to imagine a skilled, young player like Fantilli in a Kraken sweater, the cost of doing business here is really high.
Not only would Seattle likely be committing more than $15 million per season in cap space, making Fantilli a top-five highest-paid player in the league, but it would also sacrifice four first-round picks (that could end up being high picks) while still building and trying to strengthen the prospect pool.
There’s no doubt Fantilli would provide an immediate spark to the Kraken offense and help make Seattle a more attractive destination for future talent. But the long-term ramifications make the move difficult to justify.
Instead, Seattle should wait to see how this plays out between Fantilli and the Blue Jackets, and then figure out how they can “help” in alleviating their cap crunch.
What do you think? Should Seattle go after Adam Fantilli, or is the cost simply too high?
We’ve reached the dog days of the hockey summer, when general managers and other members of NHL front offices pack up and head to their respective cottages. During this period between the quieting of free-agent signings and the start of training camps in September, very little—like, practically zero—business historically gets done between franchises. It’s a time when teams begin to look relatively “set” as they head into the next season.
Much like last summer around this time, I find myself still waiting for news of the big offseason acquisition from the Seattle Kraken, realizing that with every passing day, such a blockbuster becomes less and less likely. I recall asking my co-hosts on the Sound Of Hockey Podcast, John Barr and Curtis Isacke, during this period last summer if it was possible the Kraken would actually head into the 2025-26 season with effectively the same roster as the year before. Surely, they wouldn’t run it back, right?
John predicted that was exactly what they would do, and indeed, that’s ultimately what Seattle did. Once this quiet pocket on the hockey calendar arrived, it became clear that Mason Marchment would remain the biggest get of last summer… and we all know how that turned out.
Now, following big promises being made at end-of-season press conferences, it’s looking like the Kraken—after acquiring Mackie Samoskevich, re-signing Bobby McMann, letting Jaden Schwartz, Jamie Oleksiak, and Eeli Tolvanen walk, and taking a painfully public rejection from Jason Robertson—could be all but done altering their roster for next season.
Seattle crumbled in spectacular fashion after the Olympic break in 2025-26 and finished well outside the playoff bubble. After that collapse, it was clear that personnel improvements were needed to get the Kraken into the postseason conversation for 2026-27. Has that happened? Or have they actually gotten worse this offseason?
Improvement or decline?
Whether general manager Jason Botterill has actually improved his club this offseason is hard to say. He was smart not to blow a bunch of his abundant cap space on marginal free agents, but the trade market didn’t work out the way many of us expected and hoped.
On paper, the Kraken lost three veteran players in Oleksiak, Schwartz, and Tolvanen, assuming Tolvanen’s time in Seattle is done. At this point, the 27-year-old Finn remains an unsigned, unrestricted free agent, so he could theoretically return if the Kraken wanted him back. But we will assume here that the Goodship Tolvy has sailed.
To backfill those departures, Seattle added only Samoskevich and 6-foot-9 depth forward Curtis Douglas. What all that amounts to is essentially a wash in terms of offensive production.
Now, Samoskevich could be a great fit. He played down the lineup in his first two full NHL seasons with the Florida Panthers and averaged just 14:28 of ice time last season. At 23 years old, a reunion with his old University of Michigan buddy, Matty Beniers, coupled with an opportunity to play true top-six minutes, could result in a nice boost from his 31 points (15-16—31) in 2024-25 and 32 points (12-20—32) in 2025-26. There is real upside there.
Is the young Samoskevich better than a 34-year-old Jaden Schwartz? I would say yes, although Schwartz was one of the few players in deep sea blue who was consistently willing to go to the dirty areas. Still, call it a slight upgrade from an older veteran to a younger, speedier winger just reaching his prime.
The other piece to remember is that after McMann’s acquisition at the NHL Trade Deadline, Schwartz ended up playing way down the lineup, dropping as low as the fourth line on some nights. Not only did he seem ready to move on, but his fit in the lineup had also become muddied after his return from a scary facial injury—he was clipped in the face by a skate on March 7—that kept him out for a month late in the season.
Schwartz was a good soldier and an impactful player from Day 1 of the franchise, but it was time for the Kraken to let him walk.
As for a Tolvanen replacement, that will almost surely have to come from within. Assuming no other trades before the start of the season, Botterill is banking on young players like Ryan Winterton, Jacob Melanson, Berkly Catton, and others in the system to take additional steps. He has said publicly that he does not want to add a bunch of depth players to block the youngsters out of the lineup.
On the back end, Oleksiak certainly had his fair share of detractors within the Kraken fanbase, so many folks were fine to see him head across the border to sign with the Vancouver Canucks. I, too, got frustrated with Oleksiak’s long stretches of non-physically imposing play—he could truly be a dominant and scary defensive force if he wanted to—but I always thought he was a bit underappreciated by fans. He played hard minutes, blocked shots, and used his long reach to make it difficult for opponents to get to the front of Seattle’s net.
Oleksiak’s role and Lane Lambert’s trust in him certainly eroded as last season went on, though, so it was time for him to move on. What concerns me is that there isn’t an obvious “shutdown” defensive replacement waiting in the wings. It looks like one of Cale Fleury or Josh Mahura will get a more regular role in 2026-27, after each played 23 games for the Kraken last season.
The Bobby McMann X-factor
McMann’s impact on this team’s outlook is perplexing. He ended up being an incredible acquisition for Botterill, potting 10 goals in just 18 games as a Kraken and totaling 29 goals in 78 games between Toronto and Seattle. Botterill said his main priority this offseason was extending McMann, and he was able to bring the speedy winger back for six years at a reasonable $5.75 million annual cap hit.
But why did the Kraken spiral into a pit of misery after McMann arrived? It certainly wasn’t his fault, but something happened after the Olympic break that caused nearly every other player in the room to lose confidence.
Perhaps the summer will give those players an opportunity to reset and clear the negative vibes that were permeating through the dressing room in the closing weeks of the season. And perhaps having McMann around from the start will give him a chance to play some winning hockey in Seattle for a change, something he has yet to experience.
Outstanding business
There are still rumors floating around that the Kraken could be looking to add a player before the start of the season, and let’s not forget that the Shane Wright situation has not been resolved. He has requested a trade and remains on the Kraken roster at this point. Meanwhile, we’re heading into the final seasons of Jared McCann’s and Vince Dunn’s respective contracts. Trading either or both still makes sense, but it feels like we’re past that point in the offseason.
By the way, McCann still posted 20 goals despite ongoing injury woes that limited him to just 52 games in 2025-26. Assuming he is here for the full season (and he did have a procedure done immediately following the end of the season, so perhaps he gets back to full health), could we see a bounce-back campaign from him as he looks for one more big payday?
I say all this as a reminder that it is not set in stone that this is how the Kraken will begin the season. But if I had to guess, this is how the lineup will look on Opening Night.
How to feel about Seattle’s chances
I’ve mostly felt pessimistic about the way things have gone for the Kraken front office this offseason, most notably with Robertson’s rebuff and Wright’s trade request. But I also remember that this team was firmly in a playoff spot at the beginning of February before faceplanting down the stretch.
So, while that pessimism gnaws away at the front of my mind, I also can’t help feeling little tinges of optimism in the back of my mind that perhaps this young group will learn from what caused things to go sideways late in the year. Maybe Lambert can get them to believe in themselves again, and those painful lessons of 2025-26 will help the players see it through and reach the postseason.
That does feel like a long shot, though, doesn’t it?
Darren Brown
Darren Brown is the Chief Content Officer at soundofhockey.com and the host of the Sound Of Hockey Podcast. He is a member of the PHWA and is also usually SOH’s Twitter intern (but please pretend you don’t know that). Follow him @DarrenFunBrown and @sound_hockey or email darren@soundofhockey.com.
In a summer of eyebrow-raising moments for the Seattle Kraken, another such instance occurred last week when Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman mentioned in an article that Shane Wright’s agent, Kurt Overhardt, had gone on record to confirm that he had requested a trade for the 22-year-old center.
This wasn’t the most shocking news—Wright’s name had been percolating in trade rumors since the middle of the 2025-26 season, and there had been a growing sense that he wanted out of Seattle. Overhardt’s comments effectively confirmed what many already suspected.
The way the quote was worded, though, with Overhardt stating that Seattle had “agreed” to move Wright, has since been questioned. After all, there’s little reason Kraken general manager Jason Botterill would let it be known to his competitors that he is committed to moving the player, taking away any leverage he might have in trying to get a fair return for the former No. 4 overall pick, who famously dropped from consensus top-pick status just before the 2022 NHL Draft.
Do we believe Botterill has tried to work out a trade to give Wright a new home while also getting a decent return? Yes. Do we believe he’s willing to hold onto a player whose representation has gone public in indicating that he wants out? Also yes.
That said, we have asked around, and we get the sense that Shane Wright’s camp remains optimistic the Kraken will be able to move the center this offseason.
How did we get here?
It is a shame the Kraken have gotten to this position with their once-prized forward prospect. There’s no question Wright fell short of the lofty expectations the organization had for him this past season, especially after his 19-goal rookie campaign in 2024-25 under then-head coach Dan Bylsma, who also oversaw Wright’s successful AHL stint when he scored 22 goals and 25 assists in just 59 games with the Coachella Valley Firebirds in 2023-24.
But something changed this past season under new head coach Lane Lambert. It was clear coming into Training Camp that the Kraken hoped to see Wright take hold of the No. 2 center spot and slide Chandler Stephenson into a bottom-six role.
It is our belief that this was always the plan: Wright would continue to progress and push his way higher up the lineup, while Stephenson would gradually move into a more suitable role after serving as a bridge top-six center and giving Wright time to develop into that position.
That didn’t happen, at least not this past season.
Although Lambert never admitted it publicly, it did seem there were trust issues preventing him from simply handing Wright the bigger role many fans thought he deserved. Wright’s protected minutes and carefully managed face-off deployment offer clues as to what Lambert wanted to see improved, and the coach’s end-of-season presser also implied there was an emphasis on Wright continuing to develop away from the puck.
“Everybody’s going to look at Shane Wright’s season and go, ‘Oh, gee, he had this many points [this year], and he had that many points last year,’” Lambert said. “Ask Shane if he feels like he’s a better player now than he was at the beginning of the year, and the answer would be yes, he does. Sometimes the points can fool you a little bit. I thought Shane got stronger defensively, I thought he got stronger on face-offs, and I thought he improved his 200-foot game. And what I see about that is that that’s a better formula for the future with him than in the past.”
Lambert was making a case that this past season was good for Wright because it helped him form more of a foundation for becoming a complete NHL player. If he can build on that foundation and layer the offensive production back on, then he is on a path toward a successful career.
But Wright apparently does not view it that way and instead believes he is more likely to find that success faster with another organization.
The Kraken have taken a few knocks over the past year, with players like Artemi Panarin and Jason Robertson rejecting trades to Seattle, and now Wright asking to be moved. For what it’s worth, our understanding is that Wright’s trade request does not have anything to do with the city or its fanbase, but rather with finding a place where he believes he has a better opportunity to flourish.
Where do the Kraken go from here?
Again, Botterill does not have to move Wright. If he trades him now, he could be selling low on a player who took a step backward offensively in his sophomore season.
There’s no question, though, that having the trade request become public puts unwanted pressure on the organization to make a deal and likely costs it some leverage, as opposing teams know there’s a desire to get something done. Plus, there’s the lingering potential for serious awkwardness if, come Training Camp, Wright is still a member of the Kraken.
What Botterill and the front office have to remember is that Wright should still be a hot commodity. After all, he is a 22-year-old center who is just one season removed from scoring 19 goals, and he still possesses considerable upside. If the Kraken do move him, it feels likely that he will break out with his new team. That means Seattle has to be careful and patient. They can’t just ship Wright out because he wants to be moved; it has to be a deal that also helps the Kraken.
We’d love to see the kind of trade that brings back a player in a similar situation: a young, skilled forward in need of a change of scenery and fresh start. Somebody who, like Wright, has upside but can also contribute to the Kraken’s roster immediately.
And if Botterill can’t find that? Well, then things could get a little awkward in September.
Darren Brown
Darren Brown is the Chief Content Officer at soundofhockey.com and the host of the Sound Of Hockey Podcast. He is a member of the PHWA and is also usually SOH’s Twitter intern (but please pretend you don’t know that). Follow him @DarrenFunBrown and @sound_hockey or email darren@soundofhockey.com.
On July 3, the Philadelphia Flyers tendered a massive five-year, $90 million offer sheet to Anaheim Ducks center Leo Carlsson. The deal carries an $18 million average annual value (AAV) and would cost Philadelphia four first-round picks if Anaheim does not match. The Ducks have until July 10 to decide whether to match.
The more I think about that $18 million number, the more I think Philadelphia picked the right amount, because in a way, there might not be a clear winner here. Whichever team ends up with Carlsson gets a 21-year-old potential franchise center. But that team also gets a major cap challenge.
That could create opportunities for the Seattle Kraken.
Seattle is not directly involved in the offer sheet, but it has something one of the teams could need in the near future: flexibility. The Kraken have about $18.4 million in projected cap space, according to PuckPedia, and they have a full 23-player roster.
From a league perspective, this also shifts the restricted free-agent market upward. Obviously, not every RFA is suddenly going to $18 million, or even get close to touching double digits. But more teams may need to pay a premium to keep their best young players away from the offer sheet market.
The salary cap is $104 million this season and is projected to rise to $113.5 million next season and continue increasing in the years ahead. Player salaries are going to keep climbing with it.
That makes the recently inked Mackie Samoskevich contract, which looked good for the Kraken before, look even better now. Seattle signed Samoskevich for three years at $3.85 million AAV. The Kraken front office deserves credit for getting that deal done on July 1 before the Leo Carlsson offer sheet chaos began.
If Anaheim match and keep Carlsson
The most likely outcome still feels like Anaheim matching. Young franchise centers are extremely difficult to acquire, so even at an uncomfortable price, Anaheim general manager Pat Verbeek likely has to match.
Since Carlsson signed the offer sheet, the Ducks also overpaid Pavel Mintyukov on a five-year contract at $7.2 million AAV, a deal made to avoid letting him also get offer sheeted. They also signed 23-year-old defenseman Tyson Hinds to a two-year deal at $900,000 annually. That leaves the Ducks with about $10.2 million in projected cap space and 22 players on their active roster.
The final major piece of business is Cutter Gauthier.
After a 41-goal, 69-point season, Gauthier has plenty of leverage. He is not offer-sheet eligible yet and does not have arbitration rights, but he remains unsigned.
Cutter Gauthier
You might wonder why Gauthier has not received an offer sheet.
The short answer: He cannot.
Gauthier is not yet classified as a Group 2 RFA. To become offer-sheet eligible, a player must meet certain professional experience requirements. For players who sign their entry-level contract at 18 or 19, that means three years of professional experience. A player who is 18 or 19 earns one professional year by playing at least 10 NHL games in a season.
Gauthier has only two years of professional experience under his belt. That gives Anaheim some protection this summer, but it does not remove the pressure. If Gauthier lands in the $13 million to $15 million range, the Ducks would be roughly $3 million to $5 million over the cap, based on their current projection.
The good news for Anaheim is that teams can exceed the cap by 10 percent during the offseason. The Ducks can sign Gauthier first and figure out the rest later, but they must be cap compliant before Opening Night.
The Ducks have players they would likely prefer to move, but several come with modified no-trade clauses and other challenges. Chris Kreider, Alex Killorn, Mikael Granlund, and Frank Vatrano all make between $4.57 million and $7 million annually, and they are all 32 or older.
That does not make them impossible to trade, but it does mean Anaheim could have a difficult time finding takers without getting creative.
Possible Anaheim trade angles
So, how does this affect the Kraken?
If the Ducks match Carlsson and still need to sign Gauthier, Seattle should at least call. Anaheim would need cap relief and may also want defensive help.
Is there a world where the Kraken could offer to take one of those veterans and send back a reasonably priced defenseman and get Anaheim to attach one of their young players? It’s a massive long shot, but what would it take to pry Beckett Sennecke out of Orange County? Hard cap decisions can make teams consider uncomfortable options. Remember, Anaheim already made the difficult choice to trade young defenseman Olen Zellweger to Buffalo to avoid having to sign him to a new contract, and now they’re looking at an even bigger conundrum.
Again, this feels unlikely, but Sennecke would be a huge boost to the Kraken, both now and in the future. He is a 20-year-old right wing coming off a 60-point rookie season, and he fits Seattle’s timeline.
Meanwhile, there’s the currently injured Troy Terry, who is a different type of target. He has been a steady 50- to 60-point player and has four years left at $7 million annually. He also has a 10-team modified no-trade clause and recently had hip surgery, so he will be out until at least November. All those factors complicate things.
Terry would bring skill and production (eventually), but the fit is also not perfect. He is not the most reliable player defensively, which could make it harder for him to fit Lane Lambert’s system.
If Philadelphia lands Carlsson
Philadelphia’s side is more straightforward but still interesting.
The Flyers have about $29.6 million in projected cap space before adding Carlsson. His $18 million cap hit would drop them to about $11.6 million. That sounds manageable, but Trevor Zegras and Jamie Drysdale still need contracts.
If Drysdale lands around $6 million and Zegras pushes toward $7 million, Philadelphia would come up short. That overage would be easier to manage than Anaheim’s potential problem, but it would still require a move.
The Flyers could start the season with 21 players to help become cap compliant. That is not a long-term solution, but it would reduce the urgency to dump salary.
Arbitration wrinkle
Zegras and Drysdale both filed for salary arbitration. That makes them ineligible for offer sheets, but it does not guarantee team-friendly deals.
If an arbitrator awards more than $4,950,080 in a player-elected case, the team can walk away and make the player an unrestricted free agent immediately. That seems unlikely with either player, given their age and upside, though.
More likely, Philadelphia uses the summer 10 percent cushion while it works to become cap compliant. That is where the Kraken could help, but only for the right price.
Possible Philadelphia trade angles
The Flyers players I would call about are Owen Tippett, Matvei Michkov, Jamie Drysdale, and David Jiricek.
Tippett is under contract for six more years at $6.2 million annually. He plays with speed, gets the puck on net and led the Flyers with 28 goals. That is the type of player who should fit Lambert’s system. One might wonder why the Flyers could be willing to move Tippett, but there has speculation out there that Philadelphia is at least listening to calls on him for the right deal.
Michkov, Drysdale, and Jiricek are different cases.
Michkov and Jiricek are young players who are inexpensive now, being that they are on entry-level contracts. They do not help Philadelphia clear much cap space by themselves, so to create savings, one of them would need to be attached to a larger contract.
Drysdale could be a more realistic target because he needs a new deal. But if Philadelphia still values him as a long-term piece, it may prefer to move money elsewhere.
The veteran contract I would target is Rasmus Ristolainen, only if packaged with a young player.
Ristolainen is a 6-foot-5, right-shot defenseman with one year left at $5.1 million. He could slide into Seattle’s top four and would not create long-term cap risk. He also would give the Kraken another Finnish player before the Global Series in November.
The key is the sweetener. Taking Ristolainen by itself should not be the goal. Taking Ristolainen as part of a deal that lands Seattle a promising young player or a legitimate in-his-prime contributor is where it gets interesting.
Philadelphia would also be sending its next four first-round picks to Anaheim if the Ducks do not match the Carlsson offer sheet, which could make the Flyers more interested in draft capital. The Kraken have two first-round picks in 2027, including the pick acquired from Tampa Bay.
That could create a path to a larger deal. Wright could be part of that type of trade, but the return would need to be significant.
The team that misses out
The team that does not end up with Carlsson may still need a center.
That brings the Kraken into the conversation again.
As stated, I personally want Seattle to keep Wright, even though his agent has asked for him to be traded. I still think he is going to blossom, and I do not want the Kraken to give up on him before that happens. Let’s chalk last season up as a sophomore slump and look for him to take a step forward this year.
That said, if a team is looking for young centers, it should call upon the Kraken’s young center emporium. Seattle has Matty Beniers, Berkly Catton, and Shane Wright in the organization, with Jake O’Brien on the horizon.
Shane Wright has been the target of trade rumors since the middle of the 2025-26 season. (Photo/Brian Liesse)
That does not mean the Kraken should trade any of them. It means general manager Jason Botterill should listen if another team gets desperate.
Talented young centers are at a premium. The Carlsson offer sheet proves that. If another team wants to pay that premium, Seattle should at least answer the phone.
Should the Kraken use an offer sheet?
The Carlsson offer sheet also raises a natural question: Should the Kraken make one of their own?
In most cases, probably not.
The Kraken have the cap space and draft capital to explore the RFA market. But many eligible RFAs have already filed for arbitration, which prevents them from signing offer sheets. The biggest remaining names are players like Connor Bedard and Adam Fantilli.
That sounds fun in theory. In practice, it is hard to see. Offer sheet compensation is based on the average annual value. In Carlsson’s case, the $18 million cap hit is well above the top compensation tier, and if Anaheim does not match, the Ducks receive four Philadelphia first-round picks. A Bedard or Fantilli offer sheet would also hit that top tier.
Philadelphia has shown why an offer sheet can be tempting and has also set the market for how much a team needs to be willing to pay to persuade a young player to sign one. Instead of hoping to win the draft lottery and land a franchise player, the Flyers tried to acquire one directly.
For Seattle, the answer should be no for now. But as the cap keeps rising, this strategy could make more sense in the future. It is hard for a non-playoff team to use this path because its draft picks are too valuable.
For a team in a wild-card spot or sitting third in its division, though, an offer sheet could become a way to improve now instead of waiting on the draft-and-develop path.
Who do you think the Kraken should target in a trade? And is an offer sheet something you want to see Seattle use in the future?
Blaiz Grubic
Blaiz Grubic is a contributor at Sound Of Hockey. A passionate hockey fan and player for over 30 years, Blaiz grew up in the Pacific Northwest and is an alumni of Washington State University (Go Cougs!). When he’s not playing, watching, or writing about hockey, he enjoys quality time with his wife and daughter or getting out on a golf course for a quick round. Follow @blaizg on BlueSky or X.
