2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

It is pretty clear to see when most teams win the cup it is around 8-11 years after they draft their superstars that they win the cup.

Or they just flounder back into mediocrity or worse. Buffalo, NYR, NYI.

Or you draft high once and add a guy like Doughty to a team that picked Kopitar 11OA, Brown 13OA, and traded for a bunch more good players.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by blankall

I think it just took a while for Crosby and Ovechkin to win. Not all teams have that superstar drafted. Chicago won in Kane's 3rd year and Toews 4th year.

Kane joined a team that had Duncan Keith, Patrick Sharp, Andrew Ladd, Dustin B, Brent Seabrook. It also took Chicago 4 years at the bottom to draft Kane. They drafted 3OA 3 years before but all they got was Cam Barker (and then 2 yaesr later they got Toews).

Originally Posted by Toonage

4 years for Crosby. Not bad, really.

Similarly, Crosby was almost the last piece, after they'd already drafted Whitney, MAF and Malkin top 5 in the previous 3 drafts.

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by atb

As good as Wolf is, you remove Andersson, Kadri, and Coleman from the team, I don't see how Wolf even keeps them from a bottom 5 finish. I think it's crazy for management to think otherwise.

Yeah. I just want the fate of the team this season/next season to be decided by the young players that are much more likely going to be a big parts of the team in 2-3 years. If Parekh, Coronato, Frost, Zary, Brz, Wolf and Bahl were the reasons the team was winning, then that’s great… those players are further along than we thought and the team is on the upswing. But that’s not really the case… the guys that are the biggest deciding factors in most games (aside from Wolf) are Kadri, Huberdeau, Backlund, Coleman, Andersson and Weegar. Those are the guys that are the first over the boards for powerplays, penalty kills and overtime. The young guys are contributing and slowly being given bigger roles but it’s generally those vets that are the deciding factors in how a game goes for the flames. If those vets play well, they have a good shot to win. If they don’t, they likely lose.

It makes the wins feel a little hollow knowing those players will either be gone or be further down the lineup by the time the team is truly competitive in a few years. If the flames traded Kadri, Coleman and Andersson this year… the wins they get will be due to guys young players stepping up. Which is great! Can’t be mad at that. The losses after those trades would likely be due to young players still learning and developing… which is fine.

I still cheer for the team to do well on every shift and in every game… can’t help it. But I do feel every win ultimately hurts the team in the long run. I find myself paying closer attention to the teams that they are battling with for a 1st overall pick than any teams that they need to lose for them to make the playoffs.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

Friedman's quote:

"They're not tearing it down, for one thing they believe they'll not be able to with Wolf being Wolf... they're going to let this year play out, they're not going to do short-term fixes and they're going to try and get the best pick they can"

Is confusing, but the last sentence suggests they are going to let this year play out, without doing short-term fixes, to be as low as possible in the standings ("get the best pick they can"). That sounds promising.

The "not tear it down" part somewhat contradicts that though, but when read with the last part is not necessarily full doom and gloom.

It's true though. How the Flames finish rests in a large part on how Wolf does. You can trade as many vets as you want, but if Wolf goes nuclear, the team will still get wins. Heck, if you trade vets and bring up guys from the farm, it's not out of the realm of possibility that the injection of youthful vigor gives the team a shot in the arm and they get more wins than they would otherwise.

That's why I try not to worry about moves that may or may not happen. How the team does is pretty much out of anyone's control. The caveat to that of course would be adding more proven veterans. Kadri, Coleman, and Andersson are doing fine, but not trading them isn't at the expense of tanking. The team has been pretty much in the bottom 3 almost all season with all three of those guys in the line-up. It might be at the expense of getting future assets back, but that is a different matter.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

\They drafted 3OA 3 years before but all they got was Cam Barker (and then 2 yaesr later they got Toews).

Who they turned into Nick Leddy and Kim Johnsson

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Or they just flounder back into mediocrity or worse. Buffalo, NYR, NYI.

Or you draft high once and add a guy like Doughty to a team that picked Kopitar 11OA, Brown 13OA, and traded for a bunch more good players.

Honestly the fact that there are teams that tank and don't win is almost irrelevant to me, because you can tank and still be mismanaged.

The goal if you are a strong management group is to figure out the best way to build a winner. And I think it's been proven that elite talent taken early in the draft gives you the best chance to win, and if you can pair that elite talent with still being well managed and drafting well then you will win. Not to say you can't win without drafting early too, because there are more than one way to build a winner, but the easiest path is with high picks, and that's the path I'd want my management group to take.

In the end you need at least a couple elite players, which you generally get early in the draft, and you need to still be managed well and draft well all over the draft. But the elite talent at the top of the draft is generally what puts you over the top.

The Kings were able to win because they had Doughty, and Kopitar (who is the quality of center you generally don't get outside of the top 3), got depth with later round picks, and because they were able to make some shrewd trades for Carter and Richards.

But without Schenn (5th OV) they can't trade for Richards, and they don't win without Doughty (and Kopitar too). So it wasn't just 1 high pick for the Kings, they picked 4th, 5th, and 2nd OV in that stretch.

Chicago won mostly just because they drafted really well - Keith, Seabrook, Crawford, Byfuglien, Barker, Bolland, Bickell, Brouwer, Hjalmarsson, Toews, Kane - and made a really good signing in adding an elite forward in Hossa and made a shrewd pickup of Patrick Sharp.

But they don't win without Kane and Toews.

Pittsburgh won because of Crosby, Malkin, and Fleury. They were managed well too in terms of getting pieces to support those guys (more for the back to back cups later on), but when they won that first cup in 2009 Crosby had 103 points, Malkin had 113 points, and nobody else had more than 49 points (Jordan Staal)

Colorado didn't tank intentionally but was just the natural evolution of a contender that got old. Hejduk, Smith, Sakic, Foote were just past their prime at that point. Sakic only played 15 games that year, Foote only 12.

But that started a stretch where they picked top 3 in 3/5 seasons and got Duchene, Landeskog, and MacKinnon. And then in the longer term added Rantanen (10th OV) and Makar (4th OV) to that group.

If we look at the Oilers....there is no argument that they are not mismanaged. They have been a mess management wise for 20 years. But having McDavid and Draisaitl (and to a lesser extent pieces like Hall and RNH) allowed them to still have a chance even though they were mismanaged.

If the Oilers were managed well they'd have at least 2 cups, no doubt about it.

I guess the TLDR is that drafting early doesn't guarantee anything, you still need to be managed well. But you can be managed really well, build a winner, and still not be able to overcome not having the elite talent that other teams have (Dallas and Carolina struggling to get over that hump now as they don't have their own MacKinnon, McDavid, Barkov type).

An opportunity is presenting itself for the Flames to take the easier path, and they'd be foolish not to take that opportunity IMO. And IMO there shouldn't be that much internal concern about moving pieces like Kadri and Coleman. I love both those players, but they are aging players who came as UFAs and have already played on multiple teams in their careers. This isn't like moving Iggy, or even the Bruins moving Marchand. These aren't career long Flames that have some long history of contributing to a winning team here that you want to end their careers here playing on one team, it should be easy to move these guys while still being respectful of them.

[united]

Keep in mind when Conroy took the job, the mandate was to be a playoff team by the 2027-28 season and bona fide contender in the years following. Conroy and team are fully authorized to "rijiggle" until then, but if the Flames' arena isn't hosting playoff hockey come April 2028, Conroy and team will be looking for work.

With respect to the full teardown path, Edwards points to the nightmare that has been the last decade for the Detroit Red Wings. New arena opened in 2017-18 and has yet to host a playoff game. That can't happen here and if it does, expect sweeping changes throughout the organization.

So, when Friedman says the Flames aren't tearing it down but also says they will let the season play out, this is what he's referring to. The Flames aren't trying to sneak into the playoffs this year or next, never mind be good (Wolf be damned!), but they also aren't going to trade everyone over the age of 25 video game style. Basically Edwards has given them two years to load up with young stars, but not so young you're finishing bottom 10 until 2035.

FWIW, Conroy and team would love to play fantasy hockey by accumulating 50 draft picks and a billion dollars of cap space, but it's not the reality. Everyone has bosses.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I guess the TLDR is that drafting early doesn't guarantee anything, you still need to be managed well. But you can be managed really well, build a winner, and still not be able to overcome not having the elite talent that other teams have (Dallas and Carolina struggling to get over that hump now as they don't have their own MacKinnon, McDavid, Barkov type). An opportunity is presenting itself for the Flames to take the easier path, and they'd be foolish not to take that opportunity IMO.

And luck. Possibly mostly luck.

The Stars have 3 top 3 picks on their roster. And whether they drafted all of them themselves or not wouldn’t really make a difference.

You can draft early, be well managed, and still never get a MacKinnon, Barkov, or Crosby.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Colorado didn't tank intentionally but was just the natural evolution of a contender that got old. Hejduk, Smith, Sakic, Foote were just past their prime at that point. Sakic only played 15 games that year, Foote only 12.

But that started a stretch where they picked top 3 in 3/5 seasons and got Duchene, Landeskog, and MacKinnon. And then in the longer term added Rantanen (10th OV) and Makar (4th OV) to that group.

No kidding Colorado didn't tank on purpose. Their coach was Patrick Roy. They went and signed Jarome Iginla and Alex Tanguay, among a lot of other vets.

But they sucked just at the right time in every other year.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by united

Keep in mind when Conroy took the job, the mandate was to be a playoff team by the 2027-28 season and bona fide contender in the years following. Conroy and team are fully authorized to "rijiggle" until then, but if the Flames' arena isn't hosting playoff hockey come April 2028, Conroy and team will be looking for work.

A couple of things to this point.

Kadri and Coleman are both irrelevant to that goal IMO. Kadri will be 37 and very unlikely to be worth his $7M price tag at that point and to be counted on as a top 6 center.

Coleman's contract will have been expired.

So if the goal is playoffs by 2027-28 then you shouldn't be concerned about moving those guys anyways because it's unlikely they are helping you at that point regardless.

And really ownership is a bit foolish if they think they need to be a playoff team for that season.

Really that first season you're going to sell tickets based on the intrigue of the new arena alone - you don't have to be a playoff team.

Really the goal to be a playoff team should be 28-29, that's when you need to be able to keep and maintain the momentum the new arena will afford you.

[NegativeSpace]

Originally Posted by gvitaly

I agree to some extent. That said this organization put a premium on "what it takes to win". That's how mistakes like Brouwer, and Bollig were made in an attempt to bring in winners. Even Neal was such an attempt after he lost in the previous 2 cup finals with Vegas and Nashville.

This team has plenty of players that can help the younger players. If you move Andersson, Coleman, and Kadri, then you still have Huberdeau, Weegar, Bahl, Backlund, Frost, Farabee, Coronato, and even Hanley. You could probably move another 2-3 players from that list and not hinder anyone's development.

Finally, I noticed that younger players often evolve to play a similar style to their veterans. In TB Hagel started playing more like Kucherov. In LA Danault started playing similar to Kopitar. In FLA, Lundell similar to Barkov, etc. Meanwhile we have Backlund, and other talented 2nd/3rd liners.

With all due respect, Coleman and Kadri are different from the rest of the players listed here, particularly as they have the rings to prove that. When they talk about what it takes to win, I am sure that younger players listen more closely. That does not mean I want the team to hold on to these players this year, but let's look honestly at the basis for the team wanting them around. I still think it makes sense to trade them this year, but there is a good argument for holding on to them for "culture".


Brouwer, Bollig, and Neal were mistakes, but I do not think that they were made as part of trying to bring in a winning culture. At least Brouwer and Neal were made because Treliving went with the best option available for a right wing depth scorer. He paid too much for a bad fit in both cases. He was not patient for when the right person to come available. That team never really found a right winger and Matthew had to be put to right wing when Sutter came back.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

A couple of things to this point.

Kadri and Coleman are both irrelevant to that goal IMO. Kadri will be 37 and very unlikely to be worth his $7M price tag at that point and to be counted on as a top 6 center.

Coleman's contract will have been expired.

So if the goal is playoffs by 2027-28 then you shouldn't be concerned about moving those guys anyways because it's unlikely they are helping you at that point regardless.

And really ownership is a bit foolish if they think they need to be a playoff team for that season.

Really that first season you're going to sell tickets based on the intrigue of the new arena alone - you don't have to be a playoff team.

Really the goal to be a playoff team should be 28-29, that's when you need to be able to keep and maintain the momentum the new arena will afford you.

That's all true. But there should be no panick about moving them.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No kidding Colorado didn't tank on purpose. Their coach was Patrick Roy. They went and signed Jarome Iginla and Alex Tanguay, among a lot of other vets.

But they sucked just at the right time in every other year.

TBH I think your timeline is a bit off. Those moves were them trying to come out of the rebuild after they made their 3 high picks.

Roy didn't become head coach until 2013-14 and Iginla didn't sign until 2014-15, which was after they had already drafted Duchene, Landeskog, and Mackinnon (2013)

They really didn't try to add many veterans in that 5 year stretch where they sucked.

Forsberg was hurt and barely played in his return to Colorado, Sakic retired after the first year they were bad and picked Duchene. Tucker retired that season too I think. Smyth was traded to LA. Hannan was traded to Washington. JM Liles was traded to Toronto.

They kept Hejduk and Foote as veterans but really had turned the team over to the under 25 core of Stastny, Stewart, Duchene, Wolski, O'Reilly, Barrie, Landeskog, and Mackinnon over that stretch.

They made some mistakes as they traded Stewart and Shattenkirk for Johnson and a 1st. They ended up losing Statsny as a UFA which was a mistake to let him walk for nothing. Traded the 2012 first for Varlamov (who was only 22 and was pretty good for them actually) and that became 11th OV and Filip Forsberg.

And then that prolonged the rebuild and eventually led to them getting Makar later on.

Originally Posted by GioforPM

That's all true. But there should be no panick about moving them.

It's more just ensuring there is a willingness to move them.

Because I think most people assume (and IMO assume correctly) that this season will give them the best opportunity to maximize the return of those trades.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

That's all true. But there should be no panick about moving them.

Yeah I don't think anyone is pro-panic, but from my side I definitely want to see some more proactive management (as in not riding Kadri through this season as risk increases, and/or not riding Coleman through this season until he's UFA just because we can).

Going back a few pages, for me it still sits as:

Only Andersson dealt gets the management team a "D" ranking.

Andersson + Kadri or Coleman gets them a "B"

All three of them going gets them an "A"

Also, apparently Danault has requested a trade?

https://twitter.com/user/status/2001004979365274106

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

It's more just ensuring there is a willingness to move them.

Because I think most people assume (and IMO assume correctly) that this season will give them the best opportunity to maximize the return of those trades.

This is just so patently obvious that I remain surprised at how many people want to "yeah, but" this point.

Should they panic trade these guys? Of course not and I think there is maybe one poster here who keeps advocating for trading them right now at any cost.

But if Conroy hasn't been actively working the situation and lining up offers for this season, I'd be deeply disappointed.

[Tbull8]

Some discussion on Twitter about a report that Minnesota would be willing to move a 1st rounder and prospect for Kadri if the flames make him a $5M player.

Since they just traded 2026 I guess it would have to be '27?
Maybe a guy like Heidt could be had

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Tbull8

Some discussion on Twitter about a report that Minnesota would be willing to move a 1st rounder and prospect for Kadri if the flames make him a $5M player.

Not that interested since they already traded Rossi.

[Rhett44]

Originally Posted by Tbull8

Some discussion on Twitter about a report that Minnesota would be willing to move a 1st rounder and prospect for Kadri if the flames make him a $5M player.

Since they just traded 2026 I guess it would have to be '27?
Maybe a guy like Heidt could be had

I assume Conroy would want a lot more if we are retaining salary.

[stemit14]

I think those same teams that have shown interest in Danault are likely interested in Kadri. They are very different players in what they can bring to the team but the cost would also be very different. Danaultis a decent 3rd line center that is strong defensively and likely can be acquired fairly cheap compared to Kadri… maybe even a cap dump swap. Kadri on the other handis a line driving 2nd line center that brings offence, speed and physicality. Plus he is a proven playoff performer. Kadri will for sure cost a 1st round pick + really good prospect.

Montreal is the obvious fit for Danault due to familiarity. Plus they are likely more hesitant to trade good prospect ms and picks because they are usually pretty cautious with those. But they need a Kadri more than a Danault. They struggle against heavy teams and Kadri plays a big game.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Yeah I don't think anyone is pro-panic, but from my side I definitely want to see some more proactive management (as in not riding Kadri through this season as risk increases, and/or not riding Coleman through this season until he's UFA just because we can).

Going back a few pages, for me it still sits as:

Only Andersson dealt gets the management team a "D" ranking.

Andersson + Kadri or Coleman gets them a "B"

All three of them going gets them an "A"

Also, apparently Danault has requested a trade?

https://twitter.com/user/status/2001004979365274106

Have to know what kind of offers are on the table though (which we won’t).

Trading valuable assets just to get worse is poor management.

I think we will see two of the three traded. Andersson goes in late Jan/Feb and the other between Feb and the deadline. Wouldn’t be surprised if there are more like Pachal and maybe Lomberg.