2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by ST20

I'd argue that winning is a bigger factor than the "desirability" of the market for attracting players. Nobody wanted to play in Florida and Tampa for years until they started winning. Even Pittsburgh almost folded as a franchise after Lemieux and before they drafted Crosby. Pittsburgh can probably be categorized as an undesirable market but they have survived and attracted free agent signings because they drafted super stars and started winning. Chicago as an original 6 team was not attracting anyone in the mid 90s to early 2000s as well.

Well run organizations who win are the biggest factors in attracting players. You see small and undesirable markets succeed in every sport while world class or low tax cities struggle. City characteristics such as being low tax, a massive market for sponsorships, a warmer climate, celebrity friendly and so on just become additional talking points when those city do win. That's not to say that they aren't advantages though. If winning and organizational success is comparable the "desirability" of a city may very well be the deciding factor.

As for Edmonton. If they weren't such a poorly run organization who tried short cut their re-build and ran into cap hell... I would wager there would have been many players who were willing to sign there for less for a real shot at winning the cup just as they did in Pittsburgh with Crosby. By the time they started becoming serious contenders in McDavid's career they had no draft capital, depth and youth while being right up against the cap the whole time. McDavid and Draisaitl dragged those teams there in spite of it all.

Winnipeg has had some good regular seasons but it hasn't been as consistent and they've had very little playoff success so I don't think many view them as true contenders although they have been able to sign most of their own home grown players.

You’re kind of making my point here. All teams like Pittsburgh, Florida, Tampa, and Chicago had to do was add some talent and start winning and suddenly they became very popular spots. For good markets there isn’t much you need to do.

Yet for Edmonton and Winnipeg, winning hasn’t been enough, and as a result they have trouble getting over the final hump. There’s no reason to think Calgary would be more like Florida or Chicago than Edmonton or Winnipeg.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by ST20

You're right. I believe they almost folded the year he did not play for cancer treatment but he returned after.

I think my point still stands though. They almost relocated again but then won the Crosby sweepstakes in 2005.

No, your point doesn't stand. They were successful, had superstars, and lost money. While Lemieux annouced he was going to retire, they still had Jagr. Who was winning the scoring race every year. They lost money because their ticket sales couldn't match the salaries they were paying those guys.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by the-rasta-masta

Rasmus tied for 14th in scoring from the back end. Hopefully a team makes a substantial offer soon.

Andersson's progress into the season is good, especially compared to what is happening with the team.

I keep thinking that we need to watch the standings to see which GM where there has been rumours that they are shopping for a top 4 RD might start sweating bullets thinking that they could be in the playoff picture if they just made a move now...

• Red Wings are only 2 points out of the playoffs right now but almost all of the teams in the playoffs in the East have games in hand over them. They need help soon before this season gets away from them, again.
• Senators look like they need help on D with two of their top 4 on the IR and their RD depth isn't great even when healthy.
• Mammoth are still on the bubble but right now in a playoff spot. A RD upgrade would help them lock into the playoffs.
• Sharks are tied with the Mammoth and would benefit a lot from pushing Liljegren off the top pair (and Klingberg out of the top 4). They have been away from the playoffs for a long time.

Other teams that have been interested in Andersson, like the Stars, VGK, Bruins, 'Canes are all sitting in pretty good positions for the regular season and could probably delay making a move until the trade deadline... unless one of the other teams makes a move first and forces the situation.

[ST20]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No, your point doesn't stand. They were successful, had superstars, and lost money. While Lemieux annouced he was going to retire, they still had Jagr. Who was winning the scoring race every year. They lost money because their ticket sales couldn't match the salaries they were paying those guys.

My point is winning is a major factor in being a desirable city for players in response to another post about winning may not be that important. Pittsburgh is not a conventionally desirable city and they succeeded because of having stars and winning. When they didn’t have a star they almost relocated (which has happened multiple times in their history). I was wrong about the folding piece and says as much so I’m not sure why you’re focused on the bankruptcy part.

[ST20]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You’re kind of making my point here. All teams like Pittsburgh, Florida, Tampa, and Chicago had to do was add some talent and start winning and suddenly they became very popular spots. For good markets there isn’t much you need to do.

Yet for Edmonton and Winnipeg, winning hasn’t been enough, and as a result they have trouble getting over the final hump. There’s no reason to think Calgary would be more like Florida or Chicago than Edmonton or Winnipeg.

It feels like we are saying the same thing in your first paragraph. What would make you categorize a team like Florida as a good market? Until they won both fans and players stayed away. Outside of this championship window players weren’t signing for less. Bob took a massive over payment to go there as a free agent. Also there was a great espn story about how much Florida had to do around ticket packages, bringing in chefs and building out their practice facilities to help them get to where they are today. They’ve actually invested a lot in building that team from a laughing stock. The same can be said about Tampa when they were not winning low taxes were not keeping them a destination.

I’m not saying that the other stuff doesn’t matter but winning is clearly a massive factor. I think Pitts could be a good comp for Calgary. Outside of superstars there is nothing about Pittsburgh that screams conventionally good market. It doesn’t have low tax, good climate, great amenities, culture and night life. If Calgary drafted a truly generational star like Crosby and the teams win I don’t think it’ll have problems attracting players.

As I said earlier Edmonton problems are mostly self inflicted with poor management. They couldn’t attract players to sign for less even if they wanted to with how they built out that team. I won’t repeat what I already said about Winnipeg but we can agree to disagree on these two.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by ST20

My point is winning is a major factor in being a desirable city for players in response to another post about winning may not be that important. Pittsburgh is not a conventionally desirable city and they succeeded because of having stars and winning. When they didn’t have a star they almost relocated (which has happened multiple times in their history). I was wrong about the folding piece and says as much so I’m not sure why you’re focused on the bankruptcy part.

That’s not what happened. They had a star - Jaromir Jagr - the leading scorer in the league when they “almost relocated”. And they “almost relocated” when they were winning- getting to the third round. It had only been 6 years since they won the cup when they “almost relocated”.

The only other possible relocations of the Pens was in 1978(again due to potential bankruptcy) and 2005 (after they had Sid) because Mario wanted a new arena and the city wasn’t cooperating.

And the only time attendance really dipped in Pittsburgh was (a) when they were in the bankruptcy in 1998 and (b) when they tanked to get Sid. In 3/04 they were under 12K per game.

[Toonage]

Frank teasing something...watch it be a podcast thing

[Roko]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Frank teasing something...watch it be a podcast thing

Knowing him it is. But I hope something fun happens.

[MacFlame]

Where is Frank saying this?

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by MacFlame

Where is Frank saying this?

Eyeballs on Twitter this morning

https://twitter.com/user/status/1996957741852639502

[gvitaly]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

That’s not what happened. They had a star - Jaromir Jagr - the leading scorer in the league when they “almost relocated”. And they “almost relocated” when they were winning- getting to the third round. It had only been 6 years since they won the cup when they “almost relocated”.

The only other possible relocations of the Pens was in 1978(again due to potential bankruptcy) and 2005 (after they had Sid) because Mario wanted a new arena and the city wasn’t cooperating.

And the only time attendance really dipped in Pittsburgh was (a) when they were in the bankruptcy in 1998 and (b) when they tanked to get Sid. In 3/04 they were under 12K per game.

I'm not trying to take away from your point, but they picked Sid in the 2005 draft, which was the draft right after the lockout. I believe they had something like a 1/16 chance to get Sid, which is my long way of saying those lucky SOBs.

If anything then Pittsburgh tanked to get Fluery, when they finished 2nd last in the standings. Even when Florida won the Fluery draft lottery, PIT traded for that pick. They continued the tank in the following year when they finished last in the Ovechkin/Malkin draft.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I'm not trying to take away from your point, but they picked Sid in the 2005 draft, which was the draft right after the lockout. I believe they had something like a 1/16 chance to get Sid, which is my long way of saying those lucky SOBs.

If anything then Pittsburgh tanked to get Fluery, when they finished 2nd last in the standings. Even when Florida won the Fluery draft lottery, PIT traded for that pick. They continued the tank in the following year when they finished last in the Ovechkin/Malkin draft.

Right. I’m not so sure they tanked on purpose to get those guys. They did for Mario. I meant tanking as in “playing badly”. They did get rid of vets but it was because they were broke.

[The Fonz]

Andersson is playing like a top 20 dman in the league, and given his contract/retention, could fit him into any lineup in the league. Price should be no less than 2 x 1sts and a B prospect.

[SuperMatt18]

My guess is it's something personal related from Frank.

That hitting right at 8:00AM makes it seem like a scheduled tweet.

[FlamesAreOne]

Are people having any change of heart of moving Ras given how good he's looked? Or is it still full blown sell high mode.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by FlamesAreOne

Are people having any change of heart of moving Ras given how good he's looked? Or is it still full blown sell high mode.

It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to retain him because he's a good player and leader but getting another 1st round pick and solid prospect could be better for the organization in the long term. Remember the Flames essentially drafted Andersson with the pick attained in the Baertschi trade.

[howard_the_duck]

Great to see Ras playing so well. Well timed. I think Conroy could safely set the price at a 1st + a top prospect. That’s a reasonable return for Ras even as a rental.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by FlamesAreOne

Are people having any change of heart of moving Ras given how good he's looked? Or is it still full blown sell high mode.

I am not. Ras playing great is the perfect time to sell high.

I'd be looking for a young Left D or a Center + 1st, and with his play I think you can get it potentially.

something like Bischel + 1st

[YyjFlames]

This is just speculation that Carter Yakemchuk could be traded for a defender or top tier forward, but Yakemchuk for an extended Rasmus Andersson would be a decent trade for both teams:

Sportsnet: Ottawa Senators mailbag

I could see that team doing something like this if Andersson is open to extending there as they are desperate to become a valid contender in the next couple years to keep Tkachuk long term.

[Mass_nerder]

Originally Posted by FlamesAreOne

Are people having any change of heart of moving Ras given how good he's looked? Or is it still full blown sell high mode.

I'm my opinion, given his age and where we are in the competitive cycle, the team would be better off leveraging his value to build assets for the future.

That being said, I wouldn't be upset if we did end up keeping him. I appreciate his work ethic and willingness to dive head first into the fight, and we're probably not worried about cap space for the next 4-5 years.
Keeping guys like him around to mentor the younger players is a key part of any rebuild, and you can always trade him in a few years, if need be.

Just seems like a bit of a waste, having a very good player toiling away outside of the playoffs for the next 4-5 years.