2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Treliving liked a bit of term. But let's say there's a team with a middle six injury who they expect back the next year (like Nichushkin or Lehkonen or Ross go down in Colorado). Or a team that has a winger who is almost ready for that role, but they think he's a year away. Or a team with an RFA who will take all the remaining cap space next go round.

So random hypothetical. Tell me a team that doesn’t want Coleman for 1.5 years at $2.45M.

He goes next deadline it is a 2nd and 3rd but he can get a 1st this year. He is perfect for any team and I understand why the Flames would hate to part with him but he can play anywhere in the lineup.

A team trying to move forward or a team trying to stay at the top would be all over Coleman. One of the reasons Tampa paid multiple 1sts for Coleman, Hagel, Bjorkstrand is due to multi years of team control.

With the rising cap pretty much every team can afford $2.45M

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

This list is not accurate. Multiple players you listed had one year or less remaining on their contracts, including Meier and Debrincat.

Accuracy was probably not the point.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Your post actually said "years of control left" - So you didn't mess up People just don't read in detail!

Well years implies more than one year left, which I think is the basis of the whole debate. Meier had like 15 games and then 82 games left. Toffoli has 82 games left. Question is the value of those 15 games.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Well years implies more than one year left, which I think is the basis of the whole debate. Meier had like 15 games and then 82 games left. Toffoli has 82 games left. Question is the value of those 15 games.

No, Meier had 21 games left on that contract.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

So random hypothetical. Tell me a team that doesn’t want Coleman for 1.5 years at $2.45M.

He goes next deadline it is a 2nd and 3rd but he can get a 1st this year. He is perfect for any team and I understand why the Flames would hate to part with him but he can play anywhere in the lineup.

A team trying to move forward or a team trying to stay at the top would be all over Coleman. One of the reasons Tampa paid multiple 1sts for Coleman, Hagel, Bjorkstrand is due to multi years of team control.

With the rising cap pretty much every team can afford $2.45M

Colorado.

Tampa's deal for Coleman was for a 27 year old. At $1.8M.
Hagel was a 23 year old long term piece. At $1.5.
Bjorkstand is the only real comparable. And he was double retained. This appears to be a huge mistake on TBB's part as well, because he's been terrible and didn't even play in the POs for them last year.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Colorado.

Tampa's deal for Coleman was for a 27 year old. At $1.8M.
Hagel was a 23 year old long term piece. At $1.5.
Bjorkstand is the only real comparable. And he was double retained. This appears to be a huge mistake on TBB's part as well, because he's been terrible and didn't even play in the POs for them last year.

Why would Colorado not want Coleman for $2.45M next year?

It's just extra flexibility and they could even move Coleman again in the offseason if they absolutely had to and recoup some of the costs to acquire him.


Also there are other examples of team acquiring guys for multiple runs too (McCabe, Carlo and Laughton in Toronto being examples, there are more I can't remember off the top of my head)

[traptor]

Coleman at 2.45 for 2 years is an extremely attractive piece for a contender.

Why wouldn't someone pay a premium for 2 years of him verse 1? It's a great player, on a great contract and you get two runs without being locked in longterm.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Why would Colorado not want Coleman for $2.45M next year?

It's an example of a team right at the cap, and where, if a player goes down, they need a fill in for the existing year, but not next year, when their guy would come back. That's where a rental is valuable. Coleman doesn't do it for them this year, except they maybe could flip him in the off season.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by traptor

Coleman at 2.45 for 2 years is an extremely attractive piece for a contender.

Why wouldn't someone pay a premium for 2 years of him verse 1? It's a great player, on a great contract and you get two runs without being locked in longterm.

sigh. I'm not saying most teams wouldn't. I am saying some teams just want a rental sometimes.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It's an example of a team right at the cap, and where, if a player goes down, they need a fill in for the existing year, but not next year, when their guy would come back. That's where a rental is valuable. Coleman doesn't do it for them this year, except they maybe could flip him in the off season.

A tight cap contender team is exactly the team that would want Coleman at 2.45 on their third line for 2 playoff runs.

That's an extremely efficient use of cap space on that position.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Colorado.

Tampa's deal for Coleman was for a 27 year old. At $1.8M.
Hagel was a 23 year old long term piece. At $1.5.
Bjorkstand is the only real comparable. And he was double retained. This appears to be a huge mistake on TBB's part as well, because he's been terrible and didn't even play in the POs for them last year.

Bjorkstrand shows as a full cap hit on cap wages. He was traded with Gourde and I gave examples of a team trading 2x 1st and I am not suggesting that is the price a team pays today (I think it is one 1st)


Disagre to suggest the Avs wouldn’t love to have Coleman in their lineup. He might not be the top of their wishlist but if they were going to spend prime assets I am sure they would rather have him for 2 runs as opposed to one. Teams would rather burn valuable futures to give them as long as possible with a player. They don’t give that package up for a rental Nelson. They wanted him longer term and paid up on his contract to make sure they kept him.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Bjorkstrand shows as a full cap hit on cap wages. He was traded with Gourde and I gave examples of a team trading 2x 1st and I am not suggesting that is the price a team pays today (I think it is one 1st)


Disagre to suggest the Avs wouldn’t love to have Coleman in their lineup. He might not be the top of their wishlist but if they were going to spend prime assets I am sure they would rather have him for 2 runs as opposed to one. Teams would rather burn valuable futures to give them as long as possible with a player. They don’t give that package up for a rental Nelson. They wanted him longer term and paid up on his contract to make sure they kept him.

Avs can't fit him unless he is taking an LTIR spot. They are at the cap, and next year it's worse.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by traptor

A tight cap contender team is exactly the team that would want Coleman at 2.45 on their third line for 2 playoff runs.

That's an extremely efficient use of cap space on that position.

I'm talking teams that have to use LTIR space (which isn't available the next season). Vegas and Florida would be other examples.,

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Your post actually said "years of control left" - So you didn't mess up People just don't read in detail!

You should probably read it again

[ComixZone]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1992066002163794051

[Heavy Jack]

Just get it done please and thank you

[Calgary4LIfe]

I am still 100% fine with Conroy taking his time on the trades. No rush. Flames are last already, and with all this angst provided by Maloney right now, as well as a bit of a tougher schedule once again, it will be interesting to see how the Flames respond on the ice. There is no point in rushing into a trade. I expect most of this gets wrapped up after the Olympic break.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

https://twitter.com/user/status/1992066002163794051

People don’t check in with each other a few times if the often worried about scenario that Conroy is telling teams that he won’t be trading Kadri is at all true. If a few times is at least 3 hypothetically it is hard to imagine that Kent Hughes has called 3 times in 6 weeks to hear “I ain’t trading him” each time.

It would also be strange for Conroy to check in with Hughes to reinforce that he is not trading Kadri.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I am still 100% fine with Conroy taking his time on the trades. No rush. Flames are last already, and with all this angst provided by Maloney right now, as well as a bit of a tougher schedule once again, it will be interesting to see how the Flames respond on the ice. There is no point in rushing into a trade. I expect most of this gets wrapped up after the Olympic break.

Until I see Conroy give an interview, I have my doubts that he is actually running anything right now.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Until I see Conroy give an interview, I have my doubts that he is actually running anything right now.

How about, he's actually busy running things right now, and has no time to do PR work, so they gave that job to the guy who isn't really doing anything else of value at the moment?