2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[Flamesfan05]

Originally Posted by YyjFlames

Yakemchuk is at least three years from reaching that ceiling and may never get there. Andersson is at peak and will be for the next four-five years or more.

Tkachuk's contract expires in three years, and if they're not making long playoff runs in the next two, they'll be where Calgary was around 2021 and 2022 with their core jumping ship and pushing them back into a longer term rebuild.

That's why.

That makes sense

Still they have Sanderson and Chabot who can be as good if not better than Andersson, I don’t think they need to sell their future for someone like that yet

[YyjFlames]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

That makes sense

Still they have Sanderson and Chabot who can be as good if not better than Andersson, I don’t think they need to sell their future for someone like that yet

Those guys are both lefties. They really don't have a top pairing RD at the NHL level.

I don't see this getting done because Andersson would have to want to go there and sign an extension, but the fit and timing is all kinds of right.

[3thirty]

All three (4,20,91) are playing well which is good to see. I know they look at the history of a player, but playing well now can't help but increase the value.

[FlamesAddiction]

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.

They did finish dead last the season before the lockout and would have likely gotten 1st OA the next year if not for the lockout. Of course after the lockout, other teams didn't want to use that season to determine the odds, at which time would have made it very likely Pittsburgh would receive the 1st OA under the rules at the time. It always struck me funny that even with the post-lockout 1/16 odds, they still got the 1st OA anyway. I think it's one of those things that fuels the conspiracy theory about that draft being rigged. It was just so unlikely to work out like that.

Some teams just get all the luck.

[Royle9]

Greetings from Mexico!

Calgary was very high on Yakemchuk during the draft, I wouldn’t be surprised if they made a move for him if available.
He’s definitely not in the short term plans for Ottawa, if they could some how convince Rasmus to sign there long term that would be something I could see them interested in.

Otherwise not a lot of updates, still the 3 hot names out there and just waiting for Calgary to green light it. No teams making hard offers yet, just lots of teams keeping tabs on if our guys are available.

I suspect anyone could be available for the right price, outside of the untouchable young guys. Flames open to young roster players but preference to A+ prospects and picks, Calgary has its eyes on a number of guys early on, I’ve been told there’s 5-6 guys they like who are probably expected to go top 10.

[Vinny01]

Listening to the FAN hockey show while I was out grabbing lunch. They were talking about Zhavorsky the Lontteal prospect. Jason Bukula called him “Demidov light” and they were hyping him as a future top 6 guy. Assuming Hage wouldn’t be available for Kadri that sounds like an interesting target and I know others have mentioned him in the past.

Ottawa doesn’t have a 1st next year so Rasmus+Vegas 1st for Yakemchuk+? Could be an interesting deal

[Tkachukwagon]

I was happy with Potter, but Zhavorsky would have been a great pick with Calgarys second 1st rounder this year.

[Mr.Coffee]

I have heard very not good things about Yakemchuk’s personality / character.

Story from an ex-junior teammate.

[HighLifeMan]

No reason to target a guy like Yakemchuk given who we already have within the organization.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Listening to the FAN hockey show while I was out grabbing lunch. They were talking about Zhavorsky the Lontteal prospect. Jason Bukula called him “Demidov light” and they were hyping him as a future top 6 guy. Assuming Hage wouldn’t be available for Kadri that sounds like an interesting target and I know others have mentioned him in the past.

Ottawa doesn’t have a 1st next year so Rasmus+Vegas 1st for Yakemchuk+? Could be an interesting deal

I just don't think we should be targetting another young RD with the young logjam we already have there. I would rather target a LD prospect.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I just don't think we should be targetting another young RD with the young logjam we already have there. I would rather target a LD prospect.

That is fair but having an abundance of RHD is a good thing.


https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...uk-be-traded/?

Reading this I would revise my potential offer to

Andersson(signed)+ VGK 1st for Yakemchuk + Grieg

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by TOfan

There’s no chance the Flames are getting Carter Yackumchuk or Tij Iginla in any deal involving Andersson, Kadri or Coleman.

To have serious conversations about either player the Flames would need to have Parekh or Wolf on the table. Or perhaps their own first round pick in this years draft.

Why is this the fallback argument to devaluing (or not understanding the value) of players and/or positions? No, not every trade needs untouchable assets from the Flames to make a good deal involving Andersson to work, that is not how trade values work.

I think the real problem with trading with the Senators for Yakemchuk as a return is that the Flames do not need another high profile RD prospect.

Trading with the Mammoth looks better because even if Iginla is untradable from their perspective, they have a logjam of young Cs (and wingers). Hayton (25) and Cooley (21) are their top Cs in the NHL right now and then they have Iginla (19), Beaudoin (19), Desnoyers (18) who are all Cs drafted in the 1st round. That is quite the logjam even if you value Beaudoin considerably lower because he was drafted in the 20s instead of the top 10.

I'm sure some people will say "just move them to the wing" but a lot of these guys are not interested in that and would rather get traded to a team where they can be a first or second line C instead of a winger. Also, the Mammoth have a lot of good young wingers too so there isn't exactly a bunch of room in the top 6.

Even if they kick Nick Schmaltz to the curb to make room for a young center on the wing but the other spots are taken up by Keller, Peterka, and Guenther. Not to mention But (#12OA 2023) is also knocking on the door to take that top 6 winger spot. It doesn't really leave a spot for Iginla and Desnoyers.

It makes sense for the Mammoth to move out a young forward to shore up their D. If Iginla is untouchable because he was the first ever selection of the Utah team then does that make Desnoyers available?

Then, for fun, we can get to the discussion about value difference between Andersson and Desnoyers (and the difference is not an untouchable asset on the Flames side).

[Harry Lime]

There's not much in Ottawa. Ridley Grieg is buried on the fourth line wing, but plays center and has still put up 8 points. They have Buffalo's 2nd rounder in 2026.

I think that other teams could make a better offer for Ras.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Why is the fallback argument to devaluing (or not understanding the value) of players and/or positions? No, not every trade needs untouchable assets from the Flames to make a good deal involving Andersson to work, that is not how trade values work.

I think the real problem with trading with the Senators for Yakemchuk as a return is that the Flames do not need another high profile RD prospect.

Trading with the Mammoth looks better because even if Iginla is untradable from their perspective, they have a logjam of young Cs (and wingers). Hayton (25) and Cooley (21) are their top Cs in the NHL right now and then they have Iginla (19), Beaudoin (19), Desnoyers (18) who are all Cs drafted in the 1st round. That is quite the logjam even if you value Beaudoin considerably lower because he was drafted in the 20s instead of the top 10.

I'm sure some people will say "just move them to the wing" but a lot of these guys are not interested in that and would rather get traded to a team where they can be a first or second line C instead of a winger. Also, the Mammoth have a lot of good young wingers too so there isn't exactly a bunch of room in the top 6.

Even if they kick Nick Schmaltz to the curb to make room for a young center on the wing but the other spots are taken up by Keller, Peterka, and Guenther. Not to mention But (#12OA 2023) is also knocking on the door to take that top 6 winger spot. It doesn't really leave a spot for Iginla and Desnoyers.

It makes sense for the Mammoth to move out a young forward to shore up their D. If Iginla is untouchable because he was the first ever selection of the Utah team then does that make Desnoyers available?

Then, for fun, we can get to the discussion about value difference between Andersson and Desnoyers (and the difference is not an untouchable asset on the Flames side).

Those are all logical arguments, but history would tell us that prospects such as Iginla and Desnoyers do not get moved very often.
So we can talk about the value difference but I strongly believe acquiring either is a looooooooooooooooooong shot.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

That is fair but having an abundance of RHD is a good thing.


https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...uk-be-traded/?

Reading this I would revise my potential offer to

Andersson(signed)+ VGK 1st for Yakemchuk + Grieg

Yeah it's Yak because they have nothing else prospect wise that is remotely interesting.

Well I would be OK with Hensler, but would need a 2nd compelling piece (future 1st)

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

That is fair but having an abundance of RHD is a good thing.


https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...uk-be-traded/?

Reading this I would revise my potential offer to

Andersson(signed)+ VGK 1st for Yakemchuk + Grieg

Yup. You take the best prospect you can get, regardless of position, because you never know how development is going to land for these guys anyway.

Like centers. Yes we have a few enticing options in the pool, but you keep loading up until the question becomes how you fit all those guys in at the NHL level because they’re all ready and deserving.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

I just don't think we should be targetting another young RD with the young logjam we already have there. I would rather target a LD prospect.

If you can get that big of an asset win you take it and sort it out later

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

That is fair but having an abundance of RHD is a good thing.


https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...uk-be-traded/?

Reading this I would revise my potential offer to

Andersson(signed)+ VGK 1st for Yakemchuk + Grieg

So you are just going to trade one? Or you can cut the red tape and move your asset for something you need in the first place.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

That is fair but having an abundance of RHD is a good thing.


https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...uk-be-traded/?

Reading this I would revise my potential offer to

Andersson(signed)+ VGK 1st for Yakemchuk + Grieg

Grieg is a 3rd liner. Even when Tkachuk was out the Sens choose to move Eller up the lineup rather than give Grieg a shot in a scoring role. He probably tops out as a 30-40 point guy. Not even sure the Flames would have to add if Andersson signed and that add would be worth way more than what Grieg brings back.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by dino7c

If you can get that big of an asset win you take it and sort it out later

Well I am specifically talking about targetting a RD. Ottawa is not trading Yack for Andersson even with an Andersson extension.