2024-25 Kraken Roster discussion

[majormajor]

I checked out our on-ice stats from the last 40 games.

Some slight surprises:

The results with Burakovsky on the ice have been fine - that's largely because his linemates have been shooting at a high percentage, perhaps unsustainably. But either way I was expecting some nightmare on-ice results and it isn't like that.

Shane Wright isn't getting easy shifts at all, low offensive zone start deployment. And he's winning the matchup out there vs his opposing centers (meaning the club is outscoring them with Shane on the ice). That's really good news since he's still so young. The on-ice shooting percentage is high, largely thanks to Shane himself shooting so well, and though a lot of folks will scream "unsustainable" I think if there's one guy who can keep that up it's him, his shooting talent is insane. He will have to shoot more, and we'll need to see him play a lot more minutes.

Stephenson has been getting fine on-ice goal results after an atrocious start. Although his xG% is still atrocious. We're mostly playing in our end when he's out there, trying to score on the rush and then ending back in our end.

Beniers and Kakko are the line underperforming their xGs. But it's largely from the on-ice save percentage, and that can very often just be on the goalie. Sometimes it's the team defense but it's often not. So they could end up getting better results there. They have been getting respectable xGs - not good at ~47% but not bad given the team context. Nobody on the Kraken is winning the chance battle, being above 50% in xG.

 

[The Marquis]

I checked out our on-ice stats from the last 40 games.

Some slight surprises:

The results with Burakovsky on the ice have been fine - that's largely because his linemates have been shooting at a high percentage, perhaps unsustainably. But either way I was expecting some nightmare on-ice results and it isn't like that.

Shane Wright isn't getting easy shifts at all, low offensive zone start deployment. And he's winning the matchup out there vs his opposing centers (meaning the club is outscoring them with Shane on the ice). That's really good news since he's still so young. The on-ice shooting percentage is high, largely thanks to Shane himself shooting so well, and though a lot of folks will scream "unsustainable" I think if there's one guy who can keep that up it's him, his shooting talent is insane. He will have to shoot more, and we'll need to see him play a lot more minutes.

Stephenson has been getting fine on-ice goal results after an atrocious start. Although his xG% is still atrocious. We're mostly playing in our end when he's out there, trying to score on the rush and then ending back in our end.

Beniers and Kakko are the line underperforming their xGs. But it's largely from the on-ice save percentage, and that can very often just be on the goalie. Sometimes it's the team defense but it's often not. So they could end up getting better results there. They have been getting respectable xGs - not good at ~47% but not bad given the team context. Nobody on the Kraken is winning the chance battle, being above 50% in xG.

It really doesn't look good when your entire team is under 50% xGF%. When you're looking at "good" meaning the least below 50%? ugh. It's gross and disappointing.

Stephenson has improved though, I can see that with the eye test. He probably needed time to develop his play within the system. It's been fine for what he is. He's CLEARLY creating offensive chances, which is something we apparently need desperately, but like you mention, that's leading to the us giving up the puck and it being played all the way back to our end. They aren't winning the transition game when he's on the ice. It's leading to a lot of chances against. That said, even that appears to have improved compared to where it was when we were last discussing this.

These stats are the stats of a bad team.

I am confused about what stats you're seeing from Burakovsky that are saying it isn't bad. It looks bad to me, just maybe not as bad as the eye test. The dude coughs up the puck like it's Covid.

 

[majormajor]

I am confused about what stats you're seeing from Burakovsky that are saying it isn't bad. It looks bad to me, just maybe not as bad as the eye test. The dude coughs up the puck like it's Covid.

When I say "results" I am talking about goals for and goals against, which is what we're ultimately concerned with. 27 GF and 23 GA are the results for Burakovsky. I say "results" to emphasize this is not a stat we are drawing inferences from like xG, it is the actual results that we care about.

That's a very good GF number for his minutes. Now granted, it's mostly not him doing it, it's his linemates having good shooting (right now Shane Wright). Burakovsky looks thoroughly cooked, and I think he really is. We've just been lucky his results haven't been worse.

 

[CLW]

It really doesn't look good when your entire team is under 50% xGF%. When you're looking at "good" meaning the least below 50%? ugh. It's gross and disappointing.

Stephenson has improved though, I can see that with the eye test. He probably needed time to develop his play within the system. It's been fine for what he is. He's CLEARLY creating offensive chances, which is something we apparently need desperately, but like you mention, that's leading to the us giving up the puck and it being played all the way back to our end. They aren't winning the transition game when he's on the ice. It's leading to a lot of chances against. That said, even that appears to have improved compared to where it was when we were last discussing this.

These stats are the stats of a bad team.

I am confused about what stats you're seeing from Burakovsky that are saying it isn't bad. It looks bad to me, just maybe not as bad as the eye test. The dude coughs up the puck like it's Covid.

Hand on heart I don't see Bylsma's game plan as NHL worthy. The good teams pick it off with ease when they gear up one notch. The Kraken looked good in the second period against post-TDL Philly the other day, but that was against an almost AHL team. Giving the opposing team as much time and space as the Kraken do under Bylsma is not the path to success.

The Beniers line has not looked good lately. They used to look somewhat cohesive, but now they are manically forechecking themselves out of position and leaving huge gaps for the oppo's to exploit (last night vs the Caps).

 

[The Marquis]

Hand on heart I don't see Bylsma's game plan as NHL worthy. The good teams pick it off with ease when they gear up one notch. The Kraken looked good in the second period against post-TDL Philly the other day, but that was against an almost AHL team. Giving the opposing team as much time and space as the Kraken do under Bylsma is not the path to success.

The Beniers line has not looked good lately. They used to look somewhat cohesive, but now they are manically forechecking themselves out of position and leaving huge gaps for the oppo's to exploit (last night vs the Caps).

I'm in agreement. I do not think Bylsma is the guy to lead this team to a better place.

 

[majormajor]

I am also not confident in Bylsma but the roster is so far from competing that I don't really care, we're not a coaching change away anything. But I suppose there are also good questions about whether he's the right coach for teaching the team how to win.

 

[CLW]

I am also not confident in Bylsma but the roster is so far from competing that I don't really care, we're not a coaching change away anything. But I suppose there are also good questions about whether he's the right coach for teaching the team how to win.

Yeah, might as well keep him for next season. Bura and Gru too.

e: Gotta give the guys the chance to bounce back [i.e. 2026 is a good draft year].