2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[shutout]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

How does "Andersson is gonezo" translate to
"Royle is not even certain they will trade Andersson?"

Andersson could not be traded by the Olympics.
At the Olympics he could suffer a season ending injury.
Therefore Andersson would not be traded this year.
Nothing is 100% guaranteed.

[Monahammer]

Whatever guys haha you're all the ones actually getting steamed about this. Let's strike this convo back up in 2.5 months.

[Jason14h]

I think the ambiguity is Royle said deadline (which is 4est? March 6th) and not trade deadline day

I think he means they would like him traded before the deadline DAY , not the deadline . Because the only trade you can make after the deadline is his rights after the Stanley Cup finals and before July 1st - and if that’s a potential possibility - keeping him thought the deadline and trading his rights (ignoring an injury situation for the season) that would be idiotic by ownership

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by shutout

Andersson could not be traded by the Olympics.
At the Olympics he could suffer a season ending injury.
Therefore Andersson would not be traded this year.
Nothing is 100% guaranteed.

Correct - the future is never certain.

And if Andersson gets an season-ending injury before he is traded, then he won't be traded. Fact.

But that is not at all what the above conversation was about, nor what people meant when they were arguing that him being traded was not a certainty.

[Pekkerhead]

Maybe we could all decide that in 2026 we will stop the endless back and forth bickering over semantics and minutiae.
Please for the love of god. This is my only source of flames talk here in BC so I can’t just quit reading, like someone will undoubtedly tell me.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Pekkerhead

Maybe we could all decide that in 2026 we will stop the endless back and forth bickering over semantics and minutiae,

That would probably set a record for the fastest a New Year's resolution was ever broken!

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Whatever guys haha you're all the ones actually getting steamed about this. Let's strike this convo back up in 2.5 months.

yes lets, and when you are wrong what then

"oh they only traded him because they had to"

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Guys, I am willing to accept you calling me unreasonable when it's true.
But in this case, gonzo just means gone.
We can agree, right?

There are two ways that Andersson can be "gonzo". We can trade him, which we can only do until the trade deadline really because he has no contract in summer, or he can walk away in the summer as a free agent.

No one is disputing that he is "gonzo." He's already rejected our contract offer.

The issue is the notion that he may not be gonzo before the trade deadline, meaning that we wont be extracting value before he walks.

That statement said he would be gone pre deadline in a perfect world. That's not 99% certain, that's saying it's aspirational that he's gone at the deadline.

IIRC, Conroy is already on record as saying that the latter will NOT happen...no more players being walked to UFA. I don't see any lack of clarity in that statement...do you?

[dissentowner]

I have said before and I will say it again, Conroy will get a good return for Andersson but on the very slim chance he can't get a trade done before the deadline he will absolutely sign Andersson to an extension. There is no scenario where Andersson walks.

[Rhett44]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Extension for the acquiring team is impossible according to Rasmus himself. As Bingo said, he's not talking to his agent, so no one is discussing extensions.

So if we are waiting for that we will be waiting until summer.

Royle can clarify but I find this absolutely hilarious. Y'all are tripping over yourselves to insert substantial amounts of extra words to his post to make it serve your narrative. Similarly, I really only have to bold what he said.

I am not going to become friends with Rhett here, but c'mon. The statement says they might not trade him before the deadline. It says nothing about a deadline day trade.

I think we would make great friends, actually!

But I'll just wait for Royle to clarify. I have heard previously from other insiders similar to what he said in regards to Kadri and Coleman though. I really don't think either gets traded unless we really fall out of the playoff race.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by Pekkerhead

Maybe we could all decide that in 2026 we will stop the endless back and forth bickering over semantics and minutiae.
Please for the love of god. This is my only source of flames talk here in BC so I can’t just quit reading, like someone will undoubtedly tell me.

Same...out here in BC it's a wasteland. I was in YYC last week (unfortunately a flu took out most of my time and enjoyment, LOL) but it was kinda fun off and on to listen to the 960 blurbs on the Flames. Yes, I could listen to them here...but I'm just not around a radio the way I am when driving in/to/from Calgary.


Sadly, CP is becoming a ... something.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

IIRC, Conroy is already on record as saying that the latter will NOT happen...no more players being walked to UFA. I don't see any lack of clarity in that statement...do you?

but many poster claim we can't believe anything management or media says?...

Or is that only when it doesn't support the approved narrative?

Can someone explain the rules to me please.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I have said before and I will say it again, Conroy will get a good return for Andersson but on the very slim chance he can't get a trade done before the deadline he will absolutely sign Andersson to an extension. There is no scenario where Andersson walks.

Then that would have to be at a number that CC doesn't like it seems. And that would mean that the player would dictate the terms entirely. Not a good choice. Better to fish or cut bait and make a trade deal even if it's not 100% what he wants.

[Circa89]

I have made better use of 15 minutes than reading the last 5 pages of this thread.... i want my time back please

[All In Good Time]

So
obviously nobody is getting traded and we are acquiring Stamkos and Kessel?

[memphusk]

Originally Posted by All In Good Time

So
obviously nobody is getting traded and we are acquiring Stamkos and Kessel?

LandPhil!? They should sign him up.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I am not seeing this strong majority, but whatever you want to believe man.

It's only yourself you are fooling here.

Advice you should heed, Bingo...

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

If I may, I think the problem is that you guys can’t read well.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

How does "Andersson is gonezo" translate to
"Royle is not even certain they will trade Andersson?"

Because we're all trippin'.

[D as in David]

Is it gonezo or gonzo?

Discuss.