GDT: Game 6: Seattle Kraken (1-2-2) @ Colorado Avalanche (2-1-1) - 6:00 PM PDT; ROOT NW

[The Marquis]

Can we just call up Hellbe…. Oh… right.

 

[Dowisetrepla]

Drat I missed the excitement. Great win!!!

 

[The Marquis]

2-2-2 is .500 hockey. Not a bad start.

 

[gstommylee]

this is what makes the team odd when we struggle we struggle then somehow we end up playing really great trying to make heads or tails of it is a head scratching as to why the struggle happens when at times the skaters play actually great.

of course there are those that still finger point whether its the coach or the goalies of why we struggle at times.

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

So… whoever was asking why Kuhlman is on the squad…

That would have been me

Wow, what a game. Beat the Champs in their house!
WTG Fellas!!!!

Without Toews and Landeskog

 

[RainyCityHockey]

That was a very good team effort and a deserving win against the Avs.
The only bad thing was giving up that shorthanded goal to tie the game but the team respondet well and got the win anyways.

Hopefully Grubauer won't be out for too long cause I thought he looked solid tonight.

Also, we're at NHL .500 now

BTW: I know everyone was fixating at Dunn and him establishing himself but so far I think the one Kraken defenseman making a case for an extension has been Will Borgen.
I really like how he's been playing so far this season.

 

[brewski420]

Very nice defensive effort by the team.Great win!!

 

[The Marquis]

That was a very good team effort and a deserving win against the Avs.
The only bad thing was giving up that shorthanded goal to tie the game but the team respondet well and got the win anyways.

Hopefully Grubauer won't be out for too long cause I thought he looked solid tonight.

Also, we're at NHL .500 now

BTW: I know everyone was fixating at Dunn and him establishing himself but so far I think the one Kraken defenseman making a case for an extension has been Will Borgen.
I really like how he's been playing so far this season.

Yep on Borgen. I do also think Dunn and the entire defense was very much looking better, but he and Oleksiak were again both responsible for the breakdowns the ended up leading to goals.

That’s said, every team has those guys, these just happen to be ours.

 

[Piffle]

BTW: I know everyone was fixating at Dunn and him establishing himself but so far I think the one Kraken defenseman making a case for an extension has been Will Borgen.
I really like how he's been playing so far this season.

I missed the Dunn discussion so don't know the consensus, but to my eye he looks like our worst defenseman and should sit or get traded. He makes so many bad decisions that end up with quality shots against. And he gives up on the play way too often. I don't want him anywhere near this team personally.

 

[gstommylee]

I missed the Dunn discussion so don't know the consensus, but to my eye he looks like our worst defenseman and should sit or get traded. He makes so many bad decisions that end up with quality shots against. And he gives up on the play way too often. I don't want him anywhere near this team personally.

we do not have much depth in the orginzation to be considering trades at this point.

 

[GrungeHockey]

we do not have much depth in the orginzation to be considering trades at this point.

There isn't a lot that anybody would want from the expendable list. You can move your pending UFAs before the deadline but you won't get a lot if anything. The pending RFAs like Dunn and Borgen, well , they have to decide if they want them and negotiate to whatever level they consider them to be worth. If it's way out of whack maybe move some of them.

 

[majormajor]

I missed the Dunn discussion so don't know the consensus, but to my eye he looks like our worst defenseman and should sit or get traded. He makes so many bad decisions that end up with quality shots against. And he gives up on the play way too often. I don't want him anywhere near this team personally.

Dunn was by far the worst D in the Blues game. I didn't notice him as much last game.

It might come to the point where they have to move on from him. I'm not sure. With Schultz taking over more PP time it really is just a question of whether Dunn's play is worth it at 5v5, he is often a liability.

 

[RainyCityHockey]

we do not have much depth in the orginzation to be considering trades at this point.

If you move Dunn you're also clearing $4M of cap space and can use that to bring in another defenseman via trade or free agency.
Moving him most likely means adding something in return, so there's that.

The talk about that is the fact that he needs to be extended next offseason and the team needs to make a change.
So far, he's not made the case for him to be re-signed.

 

[gstommylee]

And getting rid of dunn would do exactly besides making our already bleh dman pool even more bleh.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

If you move Dunn you're also clearing $4M of cap space and can use that to bring in another defenseman via trade or free agency.
Moving him most likely means adding something in return, so there's that.

The talk about that is the fact that he needs to be extended next offseason and the team needs to make a change.
So far, he's not made the case for him to be re-signed.

I think this is where I am at. Dunn is an RFA next season and very likely to get a raise. Soucy is an UFA and he will likely get a raise too. We could most definitely use an upgrade on Dunn for our 1st pairing and Soucy is going to be expensive to bring back. In theory we could move both at the TDL.

My concern is that there is no guarantee that we can even get a legit replacement for either of them in trade or FA. And if all we end up with is draft picks, we are going to be another 2-3 years out from being competitive.

Whatever way we spin this, Hakstol either gets even a worse team going forward OR we replace Hakstol and just see if we can get more out of the players. This is not a case of one player on our team looking bad and needs to be traded. When most of the roster is making similar mistakes, you have to think its not just on the players.

Just my 2c.

 

[Irie]

The talk about that is the fact that he needs to be extended next offseason and the team needs to make a change.
So far, he's not made the case for him to be re-signed.

I think it is important to put context on Dunn before making decisions.

Season before last, Dunn was a 3rd pairing guy playing some pp in St Louis.

Last year he got a lot of pp time, but was still being sheltered defensively, and a lot of the top pairing responsibility was distributed with the way Hakstol rolled the lines and having GIO and Lauzon in the mix. This year Dunn is being asked to carry the Offensive burden while playing top pairing duties paired with Larsson.

At the end of last season, I think he proved that he could be an effective #3 option on a second pairing. This year Dunn is being asked to be the #1 guy and play close to 23 minutes a night against the leagues top players and is expected to produce offense while shutting down the opposition.

He's punching in way above his weight class and struggling, which I think is to be expected.

Before we write him off, I would like to see him used in a manner that is more in line with his expected level of play. Moving a second pairing D because he isn't up for playing first pairing minutes opens up a hole on the blue line and I think the desire to move the player may be a bit premature. If this team had a legitimate top pairing guy, all the D could slide down the depth chart and I think they would be more in their comfort zone and the team would be much better off.

 

[RainyCityHockey]

I think it is important to put context on Dunn before making decisions.

Season before last, Dunn was a 3rd pairing guy playing some pp in St Louis.

Last year he got a lot of pp time, but was still being sheltered defensively, and a lot of the top pairing responsibility was distributed with the way Hakstol rolled the lines and having GIO and Lauzon in the mix. This year Dunn is being asked to carry the Offensive burden while playing top pairing duties paired with Larsson.

At the end of last season, I think he proved that he could be an effective #3 option on a second pairing. This year Dunn is being asked to be the #1 guy and play close to 23 minutes a night against the leagues top players and is expected to produce offense while shutting down the opposition.

He's punching in way above his weight class and struggling, which I think is to be expected.

Before we write him off, I would like to see him used in a manner that is more in line with his expected level of play. Moving a second pairing D because he isn't up for playing first pairing minutes opens up a hole on the blue line and I think the desire to move the player may be a bit premature. If this team had a legitimate top pairing guy, all the D could slide down the depth chart and I think they would be more in their comfort zone and the team would be much better off.

The problem with all that is that we already got enough 2nd pairing guys and with Oleksiak and Larsson locked up for another two or three years you don't need another 2nd pairing guy in the fold.
Especially with Schultz around for another year and Evans lurking in the AHL.

So either Dunn shows he can be a first pairing defenseman or it would be more helpful for the Kraken to try and use him as trade bait while trying to find top pairing defenseman through a trade or the draft(most likely).

I mean, if we're lucky and willing to throw in one of your own picks(or in a larger trade including more of our players) we might be able to add another first rounder in a trade like that.

 

[Irie]

The problem with all that is that we already got enough 2nd pairing guys and with Oleksiak and Larsson locked up for another two or three years you don't need another 2nd pairing guy in the fold.
Especially with Schultz around for another year and Evans lurking in the AHL.

So either Dunn shows he can be a first pairing defenseman or it would be more helpful for the Kraken to try and use him as trade bait while trying to find top pairing defenseman through a trade or the draft(most likely).

I mean, if we're lucky and willing to throw in one of your own picks(or in a larger trade including more of our players) we might be able to add another first rounder in a trade like that.

Except Dunn is a puck moving pp qb currently and Oleksiak and Larsson are defensive defensemen.

I will give you the Schultz argument, except Dunn is 25 and Shultz is 32, so I think Dunn still has a place.

If they somehow managed to find a #1 D, I think Dunn should have a spot on the second pairing. I feel he still has some development to do, and will top out as a solid second pairing two-way defender if he hits his ceiling, which would fill a big hole on the blue line.

 

[RainyCityHockey]

Except Dunn is a puck moving pp qb currently and Oleksiak and Larsson are defensive defensemen.

I will give you the Schultz argument, except Dunn is 25 and Shultz is 32, so I think Dunn still has a place.

If they somehow managed to find a #1 D, I think Dunn should have a spot on the second pairing. I feel he still has some development to do, and will top out as a solid second pairing two-way defender if he hits his ceiling, which would fill a big hole on the blue line.

So far I haven't seen it from Dunn and I'm also not willing to pay him more than his current contract which is something he'll most likely be asking for.

Though, there's still some time for him to show he deserves that.

 

[Irie]

So far I haven't seen it from Dunn and I'm also not willing to pay him more than his current contract which is something he'll most likely be asking for.

Though, there's still some time for him to show he deserves that.

Is it fair to play him in a role he is not ready for and judge him based on results when he is playing a role that is obviously above what is adequate for him?

It he was playing second pairing on a stable team with good coaching, and he was excelling there, would you jettison him because he wasn't a first pairing defender? (That was rhetorical, please don't answer it

But the reality is that if you move Dunn, then you have to play someone else in a role they are not up for, and the results will be the same.

A UFA will probably cost more and expecting to find a top pairing one is very unlikely.

This forum is blaming the defensive lapses strictly on the defensemen and the goalies when the defensive coverage of the forwards collectively has been horse crap since the teams inception.

There has been so much finger pointing at specific players to find a scapegoat, but the truth is all of the D have had plenty of lapses. The forwards have failed in providing support, and the entire team lacks chemistry and no one seems to trust each other to do their job, so they over aggressively puck chase and blow assignments.

 

[majormajor]

the entire team lacks chemistry and no one seems to trust each other to do their job, so they over aggressively puck chase and blow assignments.

This happens, I do agree, but funny enough it is harder for a unit to build trust when you've got an exceptionally mistake prone guy like Dunn out there. He's always played the same way no matter the pairing and he's not that young, so I doubt he'll change much. The team doesn't have a replacement for him this year so he should get plenty of time to prove me wrong.

 

[majormajor]

Can we just call up Hellbe…. Oh… right.

Hellberg just looked real good for Ottawa tonight.

No comment. I give up with goalies.

 

[Irie]

This happens, I do agree, but funny enough it is harder for a unit to build trust when you've got an exceptionally mistake prone guy like Dunn out there. He's always played the same way no matter the pairing and he's not that young, so I doubt he'll change much. The team doesn't have a replacement for him this year so he should get plenty of time to prove me wrong.

Dunn has had a couple of games with some mistakes in a row, but I don't think we should be ignoring his play down the stretch last season where he honestly pretty good.

Realistically, Dunn should not be playing 23-24 minutes a night.

He should not be paired with Larsson. They had flat out awful chemistry defensively last season, and they are a defensive break-down super duo this season. Sometimes some pairings just don't work and you can't explain it, this is one of those cases.

Dunn should not be drawing top defensive assignments in games.

The coaching staff is asking too much of him, and he's been in over his head and mistake prone. A good coach would realize this and dial back his minutes and control match-ups better.

Watching the games, we are blaming Dunn for being in front of the net while Larsson chases the puck around the zone, and it is clear the coaching staff wants one D on crease-clear duty at all times, so when Dunn or Soucy or Oleksiak are just standing out in front of the net with no players around them, they are all doing as they are being coached to do. Ultimately, I am not against this type of zone coverage, but the forwards have to be in sync with the system for it to work, and most of the time we see two forwards down below the goal-line supporting the D battling for the puck, and the opposition has a forward or two out in prime scoring locations unchecked inside the faceoff circles or up in the high crease - like what happened Sunday...

 

[Irie]

Another issue with Sunday's game, everyone was hard on Dunn getting picked at the blue-line on the PP on Khaira's shorthanded goal, but Burakovsky coasts all the way across the ice, turns, and coasts in behind Khaira as he scores the goal and does not take a single stride the entire time, despite having perfect defensive position on the play. If he takes one stride and even tries a little to play D, that goal is not a goal.

 

[RainyCityHockey]

Is it fair to play him in a role he is not ready for and judge him based on results when he is playing a role that is obviously above what is adequate for him?

It he was playing second pairing on a stable team with good coaching, and he was excelling there, would you jettison him because he wasn't a first pairing defender? (That was rhetorical, please don't answer it

But the reality is that if you move Dunn, then you have to play someone else in a role they are not up for, and the results will be the same.

A UFA will probably cost more and expecting to find a top pairing one is very unlikely.

This forum is blaming the defensive lapses strictly on the defensemen and the goalies when the defensive coverage of the forwards collectively has been horse crap since the teams inception.

There has been so much finger pointing at specific players to find a scapegoat, but the truth is all of the D have had plenty of lapses. The forwards have failed in providing support, and the entire team lacks chemistry and no one seems to trust each other to do their job, so they over aggressively puck chase and blow assignments.

I've got one question for you.

How many 2nd(ish) pairing defenseman do we need?
We already got about four or five.

I get that the upgrade on him might be tough and I'm not a big fan of trying to fix things in free agency as you basically overpay everytime and have to hope that the last couple of years of the contract aren't all that bad.

I personally feel Dunn might be a guy some team might like enough to give up something of value or might be willing to do a "hockey trade" to give up another guy that might need a change of scenery.

And given that we've already invested a good amount of money on guys for those positions(Larsson and Oleksiak) I don't see too much value in keeping another one of those guys around.
Especially with Ryker Evans waiting in the AHL being a somewhat similar prospect(puck moving LHD) and way cheaper than Dunn.

As of right now Dunn and Soucy are our prime trade targets, IMO, unless one of them turns it around and makes himself to valuable to trade for us.

BTW: I'm not blaming everything on Dunn and have been talking about team defense etc. the whole time.
To me it's more about asset management and also paving the way for our prospects as they'll be the most important thing to built something solid in Seattle.