2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[dino7c]

They Athletic literally doesn't have a Flames writer...they have nobody that closely follows the team.

There is a long way between could the Flames maybe regress and are the Flames 17 points worse this season...I will be on the lookout for somewhere that would let me place an over bet on 80 points for the Flames total. Obviously the Flames could have a worse season...they could also have a better season.

To say the absolute best case is 94 points is just dumb. They have a better roster than the one that started last season...I think you have to say there is at least a chance that ZP helps them on the PP and in 3 on 3. Like if he was a Leafs rookie the media would be going nuts about this kid.

Everyone is also assuming the trade Ras all for futures and don't add anything all year despite having mountains of cap space.

As for the Athletic in general...any site that says Sam Bennett is a top 10 worst contract and Nurse isn't doesn't have a ####ing clue lol

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by Bingo

The Athletic article isn't unfair at all, and it pretty much meets what I said a few days ago.

The Flames had Wolf and work ethic propel them last year, and they'll need a similar boatload of help this year to do the same.

The numbers in the article suggest veteran skill erosion moving the Flames from 2.20 goals per game to 2.08.

And that a -13 hockey team with a goalie at +25 is really a -38 team which is 27th overall in projections.

It's a very fair assessment unless you are the hands to ears "I know you are but what am I" type.

But can they defy the odds again?

I'm seeing (on NHL.com) the Flames at 2.68 goals per game (220 GF). Which, with 236 GA, still supports the point you're making. My feeling is veteran erosion will be outpaced by growth within the younger ranks this year. I would wager an improvement in both GF and GA. Not an assessment of analytics, just a prediction. And I don't buy the perception of a low end roster. Sure, the Flames don't have the big gun, but I look at their roster and see one much more balanced than most teams. And they know it. That's why they buy into the need to win as a team.

[dino7c]

Flames will score more than 2.08 goals per game this season. That is my issue with the article, its is assuming a worst case. Like the Flames are adding the best offensive d prospect in the league and we are assuming he won't help in the scoring department?

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Flames will score more than 2.08 goals per game this season. That is my issue with the article, its is assuming a worst case. Like the Flames are adding the best offensive d prospect in the league and we are assuming he won't help in the scoring department?

There also hasn’t been a team since the 2019-2020 Detroit red wings that have posted a sub 2.10 goals per game played. I don’t think this team is particularly good but they won’t be the lowest scoring team in the last half decade.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

I'm seeing (on NHL.com) the Flames at 2.68 goals per game (220 GF). Which, with 236 GA, still supports the point you're making. My feeling is veteran erosion will be outpaced by growth within the younger ranks this year. I would wager an improvement in both GF and GA. Not an assessment of analytics, just a prediction. And I don't buy the perception of a low end roster. Sure, the Flames don't have the big gun, but I look at their roster and see one much more balanced than most teams. And they know it. That's why they buy into the need to win as a team.

Balanced rosters are hard to match up against when you load up all your capspace on one line like the abomination up north.

I think the GA number will be impacted heavily by the backup goalie this year.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

There also hasn’t been a team since the 2019-2020 Detroit red wings that have posted a sub 2.10 goals per game played. I don’t think this team is particularly good but they won’t be the lowest scoring team in the last half decade.

exactly, its not a reasonable take...they either have no clue or are just Flames haters....take your pick. The Flames are deep at forward but lack high end. They have 2 very talented offensive dmen.

They are not the worst offensive team in the NHL this year let alone the last half decade.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by dino7c

They Athletic literally doesn't have a Flames writer...they have nobody that closely follows the team.

There is a long way between could the Flames maybe regress and are the Flames 17 points worse this season...I will be on the lookout for somewhere that would let me place an over bet on 80 points for the Flames total. Obviously the Flames could have a worse season...they could also have a better season.

To say the absolute best case is 94 points is just dumb. They have a better roster than the one that started last season...I think you have to say there is at least a chance that ZP helps them on the PP and in 3 on 3. Like if he was a Leafs rookie the media would be going nuts about this kid.

Everyone is also assuming the trade Ras all for futures and don't add anything all year despite having mountains of cap space.

As for the Athletic in general...any site that says Sam Bennett is a top 10 worst contract and Nurse isn't doesn't have a ####ing clue lol

The Flames have 10 middle six forwards, no first line, three top four defenseman and a sophomore goaltender with an unproven backup.

You don't have to be biased or uneducated to see that roster as flawed.

Last year they had great goaltending and solid defense because they outworked everyone.

If they can do that again ... I tip my cap ... but the roster isn't top 20 in any way shape or form.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

I'm seeing (on NHL.com) the Flames at 2.68 goals per game (220 GF). Which, with 236 GA, still supports the point you're making. My feeling is veteran erosion will be outpaced by growth within the younger ranks this year. I would wager an improvement in both GF and GA. Not an assessment of analytics, just a prediction. And I don't buy the perception of a low end roster. Sure, the Flames don't have the big gun, but I look at their roster and see one much more balanced than most teams. And they know it. That's why they buy into the need to win as a team.

My bad ... it was 220 and 208 not 2.20 and 2.08

[Goriders]

Any idiot can make stuff up in an article.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Any idiot can make stuff up in an article.

That's a weak take.

The Athletic may have models you disagree with but to suggest it's just making stuff up is silly.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by Bingo

The Athletic article isn't unfair at all, and it pretty much meets what I said a few days ago.

The Flames had Wolf and work ethic propel them last year, and they'll need a similar boatload of help this year to do the same.

The numbers in the article suggest veteran skill erosion moving the Flames from 2.20 goals per game to 2.08.

And that a -13 hockey team with a goalie at +25 is really a -38 team which is 27th overall in projections.

It's a very fair assessment unless you are the hands to ears "I know you are but what am I" type.

But can they defy the odds again?

I think someone made a mistake somewhere, the flames had 2.68 goals per game last year, good for 220 goals according to NHL.com. I’m assuming 2.20 was an error (I don’t have a subscription to NYT) and that’s why the drop off seems so drastic.

[dino7c]

Every roster is flawed, and its not like I'm out here saying the over/under should be 100 points. 80 points is low, that is a "a lot went wrong" number not an expected.

I feel like I do this every September...more often than not the Flames are supposedly a terrible bottom 5 team. History suggests otherwise. The Flames hit the over on betting lines more often than not. Like when were the Flames under 80 points last? a decade ago? They have been a bottom 5 team one time in franchise history?

The Athletics coverage of the Flames is at the very least lazy, I don't think there is a real argument otherwise.

I also don't see any argument that the opening night roster in 2025 isnt better than 2024

Reminds me of Gaudreau's first season where nobody in the media would even give the Flames a bump despite adding one of the best rookies in the entire league. People are sleeping on ZP big time, in another market he would be getting far more fanfare.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Bingo

That's a weak take.

The Athletic may have models you disagree with but to suggest it's just making stuff up is silly.

There’s only one way to find out. The 82 games on the schedule and a calculator.

Flames have a ton of players trying to prove something this year. I think they are going to prove a lot of people wrong.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Goriders

There’s only one way to find out. The 82 games on the schedule and a calculator.

Flames have a ton of players trying to prove something this year. I think they are going to prove a lot of people wrong.

yep, they were 17 points off last season, don't think Nurse is a top 10 bad contract, and think the Flames have the 17th best prospect pool in the NHL

Lets see how they do this time

[Fan69]

Originally Posted by Goriders

There’s only one way to find out. The 82 games on the schedule and a calculator.

Flames have a ton of players trying to prove something this year. I think they are going to prove a lot of people wrong.

I lean this way as well. I think Corronato continues to improve. I believe klapka is going to surprise people. A healthy year from zary. I think minimally Parekh improves the powerplay.

Just to throw things for a loop but what if Gridin or I ! Dar ! Suniev! Come in and have a forty point season?

I dont see a bottom ten team unless the defence falls apart after andersson is traded and wolf has a 900 type of season.

If their is any way to get mac t here i say you do it even if its an overpay. Recoup the losses by trading Andersson.

[dino7c]

If the Flames can continue to get games to OT like they did last season a certain young dman could likely help their cause a bit. They went to OT 24 times in 82 games and only won 5 in 3 on 3. They needed one more to make the playoffs.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by dino7c

If the Flames can continue to get games to OT like they did last season a certain young dman could likely help their cause a bit. They went to OT 24 times in 82 games and only won 5 in 3 on 3. They needed one more to make the playoffs.

I'm skeptical that they can get a third of their games to OT two years in a role.

[dino7c]

I'd prefer they win more in regulation...winning 5 times in 24 three on three overtimes is something though

[Hockey-and_stuff]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

There also hasn’t been a team since the 2019-2020 Detroit red wings that have posted a sub 2.10 goals per game played. I don’t think this team is particularly good but they won’t be the lowest scoring team in the last half decade.

I should point out that article projected the Flames at 208 goals, not 2.08 goals/game.

208 goals over a season is 2.54 goals per game.

Sent from my SM-S931W using Tapatalk

[The Cobra]

The Flames were -13 in goal differential last year.

Generally, you need to score more goals that you give up to make the playoffs, although there is usually 1-2 exceptions each year.

The Flames need to be better than last year to be a true playoff team. They need to hope their older players keep producing and get some decent production from some younger players.

But a lot rests on Wolf.