2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Royle9

This just further prooves that the world "rebuild" is subjective to the user that's referencing it.

What truly is a rebuild? I would argue that you could find a dozen+ different interpretations/understandings of the true word just by polling the users on this very forum, and I know its been discussed in the past before and everyone had varying degree's of what rebuild is to them.

• Some argue a rebuild starts when you lose 1 or more of your core (post Iginla)
• Some argue a rebuild starts when we traded away 1 or 2 veteran players (Losing Johnny/Tkachuk)
• Some argue a rebuild started when we drafted 4th or 6th (Tkachuk/Sean)
• Some argue a rebuild started when we built around Johnny and Sean as the core
• Some argue we've never seen a rebuild because we haven't truly tore the team down to the absolute studs
• Some argue we've never seen a rebuild because we haven't actually acknowledged it as a Franchise either in writing or in conversation

I think its a mix of a little bit of everything.

I personally feel like this team hasn't truly had a proper rebuild in 35 years, because to me a true rebuild is tearing it down to the studs, bottoming out for more than 1 year and drafting high (top 5-10) multiple times over the course of a few years. I personally think a re-build takes at least 3-5 years before you can call it a true rebuild pending your rebuilding through the draft/youth movement because its almost nearly impossible to re-build through acquisitions/trades.

I think the Flames have re-tooled, re-shuffled the core, but never actually bottomed out long enough to get a top 3 pick, and I think the history proves that to be true.
I think they've rushed a lot of these "re-tools" in order to try and salvage playoff revenue (and much has been hinted as this being the word of ownership)
I think we botched some of our rebuild years by trading away 1st's and 2nd's trying to chase success and windows when we went after both Hamilton and Hamonic.

It's a spicy subject though, and people will argue both sides to death so I try to avoid it these days.

We’d disagree on some details but im with you in not wanting debates to the death.
I will suggest though that many people’s time lens on this is warped.
A ‘proper’ rebuild didn’t exist 35 years ago. It’s only really been a thing in the last dozen or so.
Tampa, Florida, arguably Colorado didn’t tear it down to the studs as a strategy. The first 2 had crap finances and crap circumstances and were just bad franchises. Not crap because they did or didn’t rebuild, just crap. See buffalo.
None of those teams said we will be savage and tank and bear later fruits. They had to. But people noticed and said maybe we should do that on purpose.

Edmonton did and got f-all from it, until with Vegas won once in a lifetime lotteries. No one else has accomplished anything.
Will they? That’s a fair question but still TBD

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Fan69

Yes what could have been.

I struggle to figure out which was a dumber move the Hamonic fiasco or the Monahan fiasco?

Hopefully CC looked on those scenarios as the disasters they were as we move ahead because only thing worse than making a mistake is not learning from it.

Monahan is not a fiasco at all. It gets framed that way and I don't understand it at all.
You traded Monahan and a 1st for the ability to sign Kadri.
Kadri has been their best forward for the last number of years and you will recoup some of that asset value if you trade Kadri.

I know some fans will then argue that Montreal then traded Monahan for a 1st. But that came only after he re-signed their as a UFA.

It's not anywhere near the list of fiasco deals the Flames have made. If Kadri had turned out to be bad - sure. But he's been pretty great and still has value.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Tbull8

It’s pretty annoying to think about what could’ve been with the core we had. Hamonic for - 1st and 2nd was so dumb.

Johnny
Monny
Tkachuk
Bennett

Rasmus
Hanifin
Dobson? With the hamonic traded pick

Markstrom
wolf

Is a contending core

Hamonic and Neal moves specifucally plateaued what they were building.

Using those Hamonic picks (and picking a player like Dobson) and putting the Neal cash towards an actually useful player could have been the difference between being a first round out and a team that went on a couple of runs.

Going with budget coaching options also hampered a few potentially fertile years.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Monahan is not a fiasco at all. It gets framed that way and I don't understand it at all.
You traded Monahan and a 1st for the ability to sign Kadri.
Kadri has been their best forward for the last number of years and you will recoup some of that asset value if you trade Kadri.

I know some fans will then argue that Montreal then traded Monahan for a 1st. But that came only after he re-signed their as a UFA.

It's not anywhere near the list of fiasco deals the Flames have made. If Kadri had turned out to be bad - sure. But he's been pretty great and still has value.

Kadri was a case of right player, wrong time. Great acquisition, but wasted on a team that had just shed its elite talents.

I loved Monahan but imagine swapping him and Kadri a few years earlier when they first tried to acquire nazem and mony was falling into his injury troubles.

[really?]

Originally Posted by Fan69

Yes what could have been.

I struggle to figure out which was a dumber move the Hamonic fiasco or the Monahan fiasco?

Hopefully CC looked on those scenarios as the disasters they were as we move ahead because only thing worse than making a mistake is not learning from it.

The Monahan deal. Wooffff. If not a Flames fan that whole transaction is comically bad. I understand the rationale in clearing space for Kadri, but talk about backed into a corner.

The thing about all of it was that it was the quintessential “now” deal, and “now” is in danger of becoming 4 years with no playoff berth. While it’s not his fault, if the Flames go 0 for 5, or 0 for 6 without converting Kadri into some meaningful assets for the future, that will be another egg on the team’s face.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

The Hawks also acquired Seth Jones during the rebuild. Dach was an expiring contract (and a huge underperformer for Chicago as a 3OA). Hagel was a definite continuation of a rebuild (though they probably could use used 27 year old, 90 point Hagel more than Eiserman or Moore IMO). Not sure how trading Veleno for 30 year old Burakovsky or signing Betruzzi fits with the narrative.

Well they effective ended up with the final trade as part of their Seth Jones acquire in the rebuild and trade away during the rebuild

To the Blackhawks
2021 #32 overall pick
Spencer Knight
2021 #173 overall pick
2026 1st round pick

Sending out from Chicago
2018 #8 overall pick
2021 #12 overall pick
2022 #6 overall pick
2021 #44 overall pick

Leave it to others to determine how great of a tear down rebuild move sending out 3 picks in the top 12 to get Spencer Knight, a #32 pick and a tbd 2026 1st overall.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Kadri was a case of right player, wrong time. Great acquisition, but wasted on a team that had just shed its elite talents.

I loved Monahan but imagine swapping him and Kadri a few years earlier when they first tried to acquire nazem.

Agreed. It didn't work because their effort to re-build a contender right away with Huberdeau and Kadri didn't work.
But if they can unlock some of the latent value of Kadri by trading him, you then have the value of his years here + whatever you get back. Seems like at minimum they would get back a 1st, and perhaps more.

The worst thing about the deal was the conditional nature of the 1st.

And frankly I'd be fine if the team established a rule not to trade their 1sts at all.

[shutout]

Originally Posted by flambers

No in those moves they acquired

Kadri (signing with cap space), Weegar, Huberdeau,

They tried to sign Lindholm, Hanafin and Gaudreau

Doesn't sound like a team trying to rebuild

Rebuild 2013
Bring in youth to create new core.
Gaudrea, Monahan, Bennett, Tkachuk, Lindholm, Hanifin


Retool 2022
Out - Gaudreau, Monahan, Tkachuk
In - Huberdeau, Kadri, Weegar


Rebuild 2023
Out - Toffoili, Zadorov, Lindholm, Tanev, Hanifin, Markstrom, Mangiapane
In - Suniev, Gridin, Battaglia, Reschny, Stockselius, Bahl, Grushnikov, Brzustewicz

Those prospects above are what has come in through trades not the teams expected draft capital. Like Royle9 said a lot of what you call it is semantics and how you define it.

But to not recognize that there are changing eras and differing patterns in decisions is like yelling at the wind to stop.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by really?

The Monahan deal. Wooffff. If not a Flames fan that whole transaction is comically bad. I understand the rationale in clearing space for Kadri, but talk about backed into a corner.

The thing about all of it was that it was the quintessential “now” deal, and “now” is in danger of becoming 4 years with no playoff berth. While it’s not his fault, if the Flames go 0 for 5, or 0 for 6 without converting Kadri into some meaningful assets for the future, that will be another egg on the team’s face.

But again explain to me how it's comically bad.
If you trade a 1st to sign a guy who ends up being your best skater for multiple seasons, and you then trade that player for some additional assets - how is that bad let alone comically bad?

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

But again explain to me how it's comically bad.
If you trade a 1st to sign a guy who ends up being your best skater for multiple seasons, and you then trade that player for some additional assets - how is that bad let alone comically bad?

It is not comically bad. Assuming Kadri eventually gets traded the trade ends up being whatever we got for Kadri for a #16 overall pick.

I don’t even like BT and for years when he was the Flames GM thought he was a bad GM but the Kadri move was never a bad move in isolation let alone what the Flames might end up getting back for him.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Monahan is not a fiasco at all. It gets framed that way and I don't understand it at all.
You traded Monahan and a 1st for the ability to sign Kadri.
Kadri has been their best forward for the last number of years and you will recoup some of that asset value if you trade Kadri.

I know some fans will then argue that Montreal then traded Monahan for a 1st. But that came only after he re-signed their as a UFA.

It's not anywhere near the list of fiasco deals the Flames have made. If Kadri had turned out to be bad - sure. But he's been pretty great and still has value.

I look at that Monahan trade as an incomplete trade. What I mean by this is that Monahan was traded away with a first in order to make cap room to sign Kadri, so now we wait for the second part of that equation.


With the Kadri rumours and potential trade, there is no point in judging the Monahan trade at this time. If (or probably when) Kadri gets traded, and the pick finalizes at whatever position in whichever draft (2026? 2027? 2028?), along with any other assets (if applicable), then we can pass judgement.


I agree that the extra first that Montreal got from trading Monahan out has no bearing in the discussion - Calgary wouldn't have traded him away if he had rebounded, for instance, so the point is moot for me also.


We can dive deeper and talk about Kadri's value to Calgary vs Monahan's value, etc., but again, that will only end with purely speculative arguments that will go round and round.


For me it is how much went out the door in the Monahan trade vs how much comes back in with a Kadri trade, and whatever the value difference is, ends the argument and the constant complaining about it.

[stemit14]

I think another part of the rebuild idea is that the young players take on larger roles in the organization. While that is happening… it’s happening slowly. For the most part, the players that are leaned on the most are still the older veterans like Kadri, Huberdeau, Backlund, Coleman, Weegar and Andersson. Those are the players with the most ice time and the players used most prominently in powerplays, penalty kills and in overtime. Wins and losses are often due to how those players perform more than any other players. The wins feel a little more hollow because those veteran players aren’t likely to maintain that performance in 3 years when, hopefully, the team is more competitive. Fans who want to see the team lean into a rebuild even more would rather the fate of wins/losses be decided by players like Zary, Coronato, Gridin, Klapka, Frost, Parekh, Bahl, Kuznetzov and Brzustewicz.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Seth Jones was 4 years older than Hanifin when he was traded so not sure how he was a young to prime age player and Hanifin was a late 20’s player.

Hagel was just flat out a terrible trade, not sure I would count trading an elite two way, PPG player for two late 1sts as some sort of genius move. The Hagel equivalent would be trading Coronato to Colorado for their 2026 and 2027 1sts (if Colorado had them).

Dach was actually a good trade.

They decided to keep 9 veterans that they could have got some actual real value for when they were allegedly tearing it down.

Jones was traded at 30 in the middle of a contract and Hanifin was traded because he wouldn’t sign the 8 year extension the team had in front of them.


Also I didn’t say trading Hagel was a genius move but trading a guy on a bargain contract who is going to cost significantly more express you are ready to compete for 2 1st round picks is certainly a move a team who is tearing it down and rebuilding would make.

Do the Flames make a similar decision and trade the 35 year old who has as much value today as he likely will have for the rest of his career or do they hold on despite there being absolutely no hope they compete for a cup in the remainder of that deal?

[Matty81]

Revisionist history that they "traded" their 1st and Monahan for Kadri.

They got Kadri for nothing except cash.

There would have been many options as far as moving money out to accommodate him, including buyouts earlier that summer. Likely someone else would have actually given us an asset for Backlund, or Dube and another player to clear some space. They chose the Monahan deal.

Cap has gone up but it's a rare instance of a team giving up such a premium asset to move a salary out, and the player turned out to still be quite productive still so it is rightfully considered a terrible deal.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

The Flames themselves do a pretty good job of saving the Flames fanbase from happiness TBH

Is this a quote from episode 1?

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Matty81

Revisionist history that they "traded" their 1st and Monahan for Kadri.

They got Kadri for nothing except cash.

There would have been many options as far as moving money out to accommodate him, including buyouts earlier that summer. Likely someone else would have actually given us an asset for Backlund, or Dube and another player to clear some space. They chose the Monahan deal.

Cap has gone up but it's a rare instance of a team giving up such a premium asset to move a salary out, and the player turned out to still be quite productive still so it is rightfully considered a terrible deal.

I don't think that's true.

They literally traded Monahan like the day before signing Kadri.

It's not revisionist at all either, from the second that trade and signing happened it was positioned as Monahan+1st for Kadri.

Now I do think there were possibly other avenues they could have taken to open that space but that's the one the Flames decided on and don't think it's wrong to group it together.

If Kadri doesn't say "yes I'll sign" the Flames aren't moving Monahan with that 1st attached.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by flambers

No in those moves they acquired

Kadri (signing with cap space), Weegar, Huberdeau,

They tried to sign Lindholm, Hanafin and Gaudreau

Doesn't sound like a team trying to rebuild

2 separate sets of moves.

Yes, they tried to go for it after Gaudreau/Tkachuk left by replacing them with Kadri, Huberdeau, and Weegar. That didn't work. Then they decided to retool, rebuild or whatever you want to call it.

The change in direction came around the time that Lindholm was not re-signed. I think they realized they were being ridiculous grasping onto a contending team that didn't exist. Then they sold off Lindholm, Markstrom, Toffoli, Hanifin, Zadorov, and Mangiapane, and played with one of the lowest cap expenditures in the league.

You can't look at all of these moves and compress so many seasons into one lump like this.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Jones was traded at 30 in the middle of a contract and Hanifin was traded because he wouldn’t sign the 8 year extension the team had in front of them.


Also I didn’t say trading Hagel was a genius move but trading a guy on a bargain contract who is going to cost significantly more express you are ready to compete for 2 1st round picks is certainly a move a team who is tearing it down and rebuilding would make.

Do the Flames make a similar decision and trade the 35 year old who has as much value today as he likely will have for the rest of his career or do they hold on despite there being absolutely no hope they compete for a cup in the remainder of that deal?

As stated above, effectively below is the Seth Jones asset acquisition cost and recovery by the tear it to the ground Hawks. Leave it to others to determine if that is a good trade for a team committed to rebuilding. 8 months after trading away 3 early first round picks for a 27 year old Jones they decided to acquire 2 late first round picks for an elite 23 year old winger in Hagel and also get a #32 pick in the Jones trade. 3 top 12 picks for 3 bottom 12 picks = tear down rebuild for the team trading away the top 12 picks.

Seth Jones full transaction below

To the Blackhawks
2021 #32 overall pick
Spencer Knight
2021 #173 overall pick
2026 1st round pick

Sending out from Chicago
2018 #8 overall pick
2021 #12 overall pick
2022 #6 overall pick
2021 #44 overall pick

To be clear you think that when a team would collectively trade 3 first round picks in the top 12 of the draft for 2 likely late round firsts in the same season it is a sign they are tearing it down?

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by Matty81

Revisionist history that they "traded" their 1st and Monahan for Kadri.

They got Kadri for nothing except cash.

There would have been many options as far as moving money out to accommodate him, including buyouts earlier that summer. Likely someone else would have actually given us an asset for Backlund, or Dube and another player to clear some space. They chose the Monahan deal.

Cap has gone up but it's a rare instance of a team giving up such a premium asset to move a salary out, and the player turned out to still be quite productive still so it is rightfully considered a terrible deal.

I don't think it was revisionist history at all - Flames couldn't sign Kadri until they made room, and Monahan was the room that was made.


The organization was rumoured to have tried to move Lucic, but he refused to waive his NTC apparently. Yes, they could have moved other pieces, but that doesn't have anything to do with the moves that were made.


Out: Monahan, a first and cap space
In: Kadri and his 7 million cap hit


I don't see what is revisionist about connecting these two players.

[D as in David]

I long for a trade rumour that could (temporarily) save this thread.