Between some absolutely bizarre and bad picks (some of which seem like Hak-based decisions) as well as this signing, Seattle looks like it might be pretty badly run.
Their justification for making some bad expansion picks was tons of cap space, then they use it on this. So, explain that rationale now fellas.
I wanted him on the Oilers but that's going to look bad after a couple years.
They got Larsson at a better price
first move that shows Kraken is like the rest of the NHL, reaching and overspending some for what they want.Not awful but still a pretty bad contract
For an expansion team, I think its alrightIt looks rough now.
And who among them is better? Has more experience? Pretty short list after Gio and Larsson.
You have to evaluate the signing in context. The context is that Seattle has zero other options and needs to take what few proven commodities are out there. $4.6m x 5 is a lulwhut grade for a cap strapped team but it's great for Seattle.
Unless it turns out to be a disaster its going rate for top 4 shutdown Dmen. Its what the cap says the most average players should make.
He's not a shutdown defenseman. If you sign him for that he'll be a failure.
He's an excellent puck carrier that can lead the breakout . Thats by far the best part of his game.
His defensive game is filled with many brainfarts.
Unless it turns out to be a disaster its going rate for top 4 shutdown Dmen. Its what the cap says the most average players should make.