Seattle Kraken
Pacific Division, Western Conference
Current Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PTS | GF | GA | DIFF | PTS % | Last 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 75 | 32 | 32 | 11 | 75 | 210 | 237 | -27 | 50.0% |
|
Playoff Probabilities
Based on 100,000 simulations run on Apr 07, 2026
Analysis
Summary
The Seattle Kraken are on the brink, sitting at just a 5.7% playoff probability after a steep 7.4% drop. At 75 points through 74 games, they likely need close to 13 points in their final eight games to have a realistic shot at the Western Conference’s final wild-card spot. Anything short of a near-perfect finish probably leaves them short of the projected 87.9-point cutoff.
Record and Recent Performance
Seattle’s 32-31-11 record translates to a 50.7% points percentage, essentially break-even hockey over a large sample. Their -25 goal differential (208 scored, 233 allowed) reflects a team that has struggled defensively and at five-on-five, which aligns with their 45.4% overall strength rating. They’ve been better at home (48.3%) than on the road (43.6%), but not enough to tilt the math in their favor, and their recent form rating of 40.0% suggests they’re trending in the wrong direction at the worst possible time.
The Competition
The climb is steep because of traffic ahead. Nashville currently holds the final playoff spot at 79 points with a 31.5% playoff probability, while San Jose (79 points, 45.4%) and Los Angeles (79 points, 24.2%) are also directly in front. Seattle must leapfrog at least three of those teams and likely catch Nashville or San Jose, both projected around 87–88 points. With Edmonton, Anaheim, Utah, and Vegas already in the mid-80s and projected into the 90s, those spots are effectively gone, leaving Seattle chasing a crowded wild-card pack where they are currently 13th in the conference standings.
Remaining Schedule
The Kraken have eight games left, evenly split between home and road, with an opponent strength of 51.1%, slightly easier than the league average of 52.9%. The schedule is considered balanced and average in difficulty, and models project 8.8 more points, which would land them at 83.8—well short of the 87.9 projected cutoff. To bridge that gap, Seattle likely needs at least a 6-1-1 or 7-1-0 finish, significantly outperforming their season-long pace and recent form.
Outlook
At 5.7%, the Kraken are in long-shot territory. The math demands a surge that this team hasn’t shown consistently all year, combined with help from multiple teams above them stumbling. It’s not impossible, but Seattle’s playoff hopes now depend on a dramatic late push and favorable scoreboard watching across the Western Conference.
Bandwagon Options
Your team's playoff hopes are fading — here are some teams worth cheering for:
Carolina Hurricanes
Metropolitan · Eastern| W | L | OTL | PTS | Diff | Str | Playoff | Cup |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 49 | 22 | 6 | 104 | +47 | 63.9% | 100.0% | 9.3% |
If you want to jump on a true contender, Carolina is easy to love. They roll four lines, pressure relentlessly, and feel like a deeper, more finished version of what Seattle has tried to build. Watching Sebastian Aho and Andrei Svechnikov drive play every night makes for stress-free, high-quality playoff hockey.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Atlantic · Eastern| W | L | OTL | PTS | Diff | Str | Playoff | Cup |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 48 | 22 | 6 | 102 | +66 | 67.8% | 100.0% | 11.0% |
Tampa Bay brings star power and big-game pedigree, headlined by Nikita Kucherov and Brayden Point. If you’re craving elite skill and a power play that can flip a series in minutes, this is your wagon. They’re battle-tested and rarely make playoff hockey boring.
Buffalo Sabres
Atlantic · Eastern| W | L | OTL | PTS | Diff | Str | Playoff | Cup |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 46 | 23 | 8 | 100 | +35 | 60.0% | 100.0% | 5.6% |
Buffalo is the fun, high-octane pick with a fan base that’s been starving for this moment. The Sabres can score in waves, and their young core plays with the kind of energy Kraken fans can appreciate. It’s a good mix of legit contender and feel-good story.
Colorado Avalanche
Central · Western| W | L | OTL | PTS | Diff | Str | Playoff | Cup |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 50 | 16 | 10 | 110 | +91 | 68.8% | 100.0% | 12.4% |
If you’d rather stick in the West without backing a Pacific rival, Colorado is the heavyweight option. Nathan MacKinnon and Cale Makar are must-watch every shift, and the Avs’ speed-and-skill identity isn’t far off from Seattle’s ideal blueprint. They’re the kind of team that can steamroll a round when they’re on.
Ottawa Senators
Atlantic · Eastern| W | L | OTL | PTS | Diff | Str | Playoff | Cup |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40 | 27 | 10 | 90 | +20 | 57.5% | 74.0% | 3.6% |
Ottawa is a sneaky, scrappy bandwagon choice if you want a little underdog flavor. They’ve taken a big step forward and play an aggressive, emotionally charged style that fits playoff chaos. It’s a lower-pressure ride with real upset potential.
Required Win Percentage for Playoffs
Win percentage needed in remaining games to achieve each playoff probability threshold. A checkmark (✓) means the team has mathematically clinched a playoff spot. A dash (—) means the threshold is impossible to reach.
Playoff Probability Breakdown
Understanding the factors that drive the 0.1% playoff probability
📊 Schedule Context
🎯 Key Factors
🏒 Playoff Picture
Playoff probabilities are calculated through Monte Carlo simulation, running 10,000+ scenarios of the remaining season. Each game is simulated based on team strength ratings, home ice advantage (~55% win rate), and opponent matchups.
Points Distribution vs. Cutline
Projected to finish with 80–83 points (middle 50%). The playoff cutline is typically 88–90 points. Finishes above the cutline in 0.2% of simulations.
Team Projection
Playoff Cutline
Playoff Race — Western Conference
| # | Team | PTS | GP | Left | STR | L10 | SOS | Proj PTS | Playoff % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | 87 | 77 | 5 | 56.7% | 70.0% | 50.5% | 92.8 | 98.4% | |
| 5 | 87 | 77 | 5 | 50.6% | 50.0% | 48.3% | 92.8 | 96.8% | |
| 6 | 86 | 76 | 6 | 57.2% | 60.0% | 53.6% | 93.1 | 98.3% | |
| 7 | 86 | 77 | 5 | 52.5% | 50.0% | 47.1% | 92.0 | 96.2% | |
| 8 | 81 | 76 | 6 | 52.7% | 70.0% | 52.4% | 87.9 | 44.2% | |
| 9 | 81 | 76 | 6 | 50.1% | 60.0% | 43.3% | 88.1 | 36.8% | |
| 10 | 79 | 75 | 7 | 46.2% | 45.0% | 46.1% | 86.7 | 22.3% | |
| 11 | 78 | 76 | 6 | 50.7% | 70.0% | 55.9% | 84.7 | 5.7% | |
| 12 | 78 | 76 | 6 | 50.5% | 60.0% | 52.6% | 83.5 | 1.2% | |
| 13 | 75 | 75 | 7 | 43.0% | 30.0% | 55.2% | 81.3 | 0.1% | |
| 14 | 72 | 76 | 6 | 47.3% | 65.0% | 57.6% | 78.1 | 0.0% | |
Today's Impact
| Game | Impact | |
|---|---|---|
| LIVE WPG vs SEA | SEA playing |
WPG win:
-0.6%
SEA win:
+0.8%
|
Team Strength Metrics
| Overall Strength | Home Strength | Away Strength | Pythagorean Win % | Recent Form |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 43.0% | 45.2% | 41.8% | 44.0% | 30.0% |
Player Statistics
| # | Player | Pos | GP | G | A | PTS | +/- | SOG | HIT | BLK | TOI | Performance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Jordan Eberle | R | 71 | 24 | 28 | 52 | +3 | 0 | 50 | 40 | 18:34 | |
| 10 | Matty Beniers | C | 73 | 18 | 27 | 45 | -6 | 0 | 28 | 62 | 19:24 | |
| 9 | Chandler Stephenson | C | 71 | 15 | 29 | 44 | -23 | 0 | 19 | 50 | 19:29 | |
| 29 | Vince Dunn | D | 72 | 10 | 29 | 39 | -28 | 0 | 21 | 73 | 21:52 | |
| 20 | Eeli Tolvanen | R | 70 | 12 | 24 | 36 | -16 | 0 | 174 | 76 | 16:11 | |
| 19 | Jared McCann | L | 47 | 17 | 18 | 35 | -7 | 0 | 39 | 23 | 16:34 | |
| 84 | Kaapo Kakko | R | 56 | 11 | 22 | 33 | +13 | 0 | 30 | 9 | 14:16 | |
| 62 | Brandon Montour | D | 55 | 8 | 20 | 28 | -18 | 0 | 63 | 68 | 22:42 | |
| 51 | Shane Wright | C | 70 | 11 | 14 | 25 | +4 | 0 | 48 | 55 | 13:52 | |
| 17 | Jaden Schwartz | L | 44 | 11 | 11 | 22 | +6 | 0 | 31 | 40 | 16:10 | |
| 89 | Frederick Gaudreau | C | 59 | 5 | 16 | 21 | -1 | 0 | 29 | 44 | 16:11 | |
| 6 | Adam Larsson | D | 73 | 5 | 16 | 21 | -4 | 0 | 96 | 153 | 21:21 | |
| 26 | Ryan Winterton | C | 61 | 4 | 13 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 56 | 28 | 11:50 | |
| 41 | Ryker Evans | D | 58 | 8 | 7 | 15 | +6 | 0 | 38 | 59 | 17:32 | |
| 27 | Berkly Catton | C | 57 | 6 | 9 | 15 | -6 | 0 | 6 | 27 | 12:56 | |
| 59 | Ben Meyers | C | 47 | 7 | 7 | 14 | -11 | 0 | 58 | 10 | 11:48 | |
| 24 | Jamie Oleksiak | D | 71 | 5 | 8 | 13 | +10 | 0 | 106 | 102 | 16:57 | |
| 17 | Mason Marchment → CBJ | L | 29 | 4 | 9 | 13 | -4 | 0 | 38 | 10 | 16:57 | |
| 74 | Bobby McMann ← TOR → TOR | C | 11 | 8 | 4 | 12 | +1 | 0 | 19 | 3 | 18:10 | |
| 55 | Ryan Lindgren | D | 69 | 2 | 7 | 9 | +5 | 0 | 42 | 105 | 18:21 | |
| 24 | Tye Kartye → NYR | L | 40 | 3 | 5 | 8 | -6 | 0 | 98 | 23 | 10:42 | |
| 63 | Jacob Melanson | R | 34 | 2 | 3 | 5 | -9 | 0 | 175 | 12 | 9:25 | |
| 8 | Cale Fleury | D | 20 | 1 | 2 | 3 | +3 | 0 | 43 | 28 | 16:39 | |
| 28 | Joshua Mahura | D | 21 | 1 | 2 | 3 | +8 | 0 | 22 | 34 | 15:24 | |
| 38 | Jani Nyman | R | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | -5 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 7:07 | |
| 78 | Oscar Fisker Molgaard | C | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 9:09 |
Recent Games (Last 10)
| Date | Opponent | Score | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 04 | vs CHI | 2 - 4 | L |
| Apr 02 | vs UTA | 2 - 6 | L |
| Mar 31 | @ EDM | 3 - 0 | L |
| Mar 28 | @ BUF | 3 - 2 | L (OT/SO) |
| Mar 26 | @ TBL | 3 - 4 | W (OT/SO) |
| Mar 24 | @ FLA | 5 - 4 | L (OT/SO) |
| Mar 21 | @ CBJ | 5 - 2 | L |
| Mar 19 | @ NSH | 3 - 1 | L |
| Mar 17 | vs TBL | 2 - 6 | L |
| Mar 15 | vs FLA | 6 - 2 | W |
Upcoming Games
| Date | Opponent | Location | Opp Strength | Exp Pts | Playoff Swing | Predicted Winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 07, 20:00 | @ Minnesota Wild | Away | 59.9% | 0.97 | 0.3% | MIN (59%) |
| Apr 09, 22:00 | vs Vegas Golden Knights | Home | 52.5% | 1.07 | 0.2% | VGK (53%) |
| Apr 11, 19:00 | vs Calgary Flames | Home | 47.3% | 1.26 | 0.2% | SEA (58%) |
| Apr 13, 21:30 | vs Los Angeles Kings | Home | 50.1% | 1.02 | - | LAK (56%) |
| Apr 15, 22:00 | @ Vegas Golden Knights | Away | 52.5% | 1.02 | - | VGK (56%) |
| Apr 16, 22:30 | @ Colorado Avalanche | Away | 68.8% | 0.93 | - | COL (61%) |
| Averages (Next 6 games): | 6.3 pts | 0.2% | ||||
Expected points are calculated based on win probabilities: (2 × win%) + (0.25 × loss%) for overtime losses. Opponent strength ratings help identify which games are easier or harder opportunities to earn points.