2024/2025 Season trade rumours and speculation thread

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Royle9

The team is definitely not built around Wolf.
Flames absolutely lucked out on taking a shot at a very undersized yet underestimated goalie and its paid off for them in spades.

But to say they've built the team around Wolf is asinine.
Wolf's started half a season in the NHL its impossible to say.

Now starting this year you could say they've pushed their "window" if you want to call it that due to having a calder finalist goalie, but you cant really blame them as Wolf is bound to steal you a handful of games again this year that we should probably lose.

Fair enough. I rephrased the question to Chat GPT.

What number of NHL teams in the last 15 years have become contenders when they have an elite goaltender early in their retool or rebuild.


ChatGPT said:


(Total: 6)

Montreal Canadiens – Carey Price

Buffalo Sabres – Ryan Miller

Florida Panthers – Roberto Luongo

NY Islanders – Rick DiPietro

Minnesota Wild – Niklas Bäckström

Calgary Flames – Miikka Kiprusoff

✅ How Many Became Real Contenders or Cup Teams?
0 out of 6 became true, sustained contenders (multiple playoff rounds, consistent Cup potential).

Montreal made one Final (2021) but was not a sustained contender.

Even giving Montreal partial credit, that’s 1 out of 6, or roughly 17% success rate.

📊 Estimated Success Rate:
🔥 ~0–17% of teams that built starting with an elite goaltender early in a rebuild became contenders in the last 15 years.

In contrast, nearly every modern Cup winner or finalist had elite skaters in place before goaltending solidified.

AI isnt the end all be all obviously, and I don't really think DiPietro would be considered elite at the NHL lvl either but food for thought.

[Fan69]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Depends. I think you can blame them if they try and build a team to compete without anyone close to a #1C on the roster. If they can swing a trade for a McTavish or something then go for it but that #1C is a necessity.

Kadri is playing at first line levels. Why are posters utterly ignoring this?

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Fan69

Kadri is playing at first line levels. Why are posters utterly ignoring this?

First line level on a non-contending/non-successful team.

No one is ignoring what Kadri has done, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone at this stage who think he's done anything but live up to his contract.

However, even in his absolute peak, he wasn't a #1 centre on a contending team - I'd gather that's what Bonded was saying. He's not that guy, and that's not his fault. He is slotted incorrectly here.

[FlamesAreOne]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1932903691092140139

[ComixZone]

I like Byram. I remember watching one of his Mic'd up/behind the scenes videos and he's hungry to be a #1 defenceman.

I doubt it's possible, but if you could somehow get Buffalo (worst run team in the league by a good stretch) to bite on a package somewhere in the value of Hamonic's return, it's not a bad one to go with. Late 1st + 2nd + 2nd or equivalent (Late 1st + 2nd + Pospisil?), that'd be a great move - but understand Buffalo is probably more focused on their immediate needs.

[Badgers Nose]

NMCs across the league are going to limit the return for BUF. No one wants to go there if they don't have to.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by Fan69

Kadri is playing at first line levels. Why are posters utterly ignoring this?

Because he'll be 35 in October.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Psytic

Here is what our AI overlord Chat GPT thinks about building around an elite goalie.

1. Florida Panthers (Late 1990s – Early 2010s with Roberto Luongo)
Elite Goalie: Roberto Luongo (acquired from NYI in 2000)
Missed Opportunity: Drafted poorly in the early 2000s (e.g., Nathan Horton, Rostislav Olesz, Keaton Ellerby)
Result: Despite Luongo's brilliance, Florida failed to build a strong core around him. They missed the playoffs in most seasons and only made it once (2000) during his tenure.
Why: Front-office instability, lack of forward depth, poor defensive core.

2. Minnesota Wild (2000s–2010s with Niklas Bäckström)
Elite Goalie: Niklas Bäckström (undrafted, signed in 2006)
Missed Opportunity: Focused on defensive systems and failed to draft or develop elite forwards consistently. (e.g., James Sheppard over Anze Kopitar)
Result: Made playoffs occasionally but never a real contender.
Why: Weak center depth for years.

3. Vancouver Canucks (Early 2000s with Dan Cloutier & then Luongo again in late 2000s)
Elite Goalie: Roberto Luongo (again)
Missed Opportunity: Though eventually successful (2011 Cup Final), early years saw high reliance on Luongo with slow growth of core players.
Debatable: They did eventually contend, but Luongo’s peak overlapped with rebuilding years.
Why: Mismanaged assets, slow build-up to the Sedin-led era.


5. Buffalo Sabres (Ryan Miller era, 2002–2014)
Elite Goalie: Ryan Miller
Missed Opportunity: Failed to surround him with consistent forward talent post-2007. Thomas Vanek was good, but not enough depth.
Result: One strong run (2006), then decline. They never reloaded properly.
Why: Traded key forwards, cap mismanagement (e.g., overpaid secondary players), no elite D core.


6. Calgary Flames (Miikka Kiprusoff era, 2003–2013)
Elite Goalie: Miikka Kiprusoff
Missed Opportunity: Too reliant on Jarome Iginla with little support; weak drafting outside top rounds.
Result: One Cup Final (2004), then mediocrity.
Why: Failed to develop depth behind Iginla; defensive core eroded.

7. Montreal Canadiens (Carey Price era, 2007–2022)
Elite Goalie: Carey Price (5th overall, 2005)
Missed Opportunity: Drafted Price instead of a top forward (Anze Kopitar was available). Later years saw poor asset use (e.g., Subban for Weber; Sergachev trade).
Result: Strong seasons but only one Cup Final appearance (2021); inconsistent offense and injuries derailed chances.
Why: Focused on defense/goaltending identity; lack of elite centers until Suzuki; inconsistent roster strategy.


Why This Happens:
Overvaluing goalies: Some teams pick goalies instead of franchise centers or defensemen (DiPietro, Price).
Cap allocation: Locking up a goalie for big money limits flexibility elsewhere.
Roster imbalance: Investing in goaltending without a core of forwards/defense often leads to wasted prime years.

Key Takeaway
Building around an elite goalie first rarely works. The successful teams of the last 15 years mostly had elite skaters already, and the goaltender either emerged later or was plugged in. The few times it worked (e.g., Tampa, LA), the goalie wasn’t the foundational piece, but rather a complement to a loaded roster.

I think your end conclusion of "Investing in goaltending without a core of forwards/defense often leads to wasted prime years." is accurate. But it also works out in reverse as well IMO: investing in core forwards / defense without a elite goalie leads to wasted prime years.

You had a list of teams with IMO a range of good to elite goalies that failed to win the cup because of other roster deficiencies. I agree. But your list will be equally as long on teams with strong forward / defense cores who failed to win the cup because goaltending fell short. You just went looking for the examples in one direction.

Without doing the analysis, look at the goalies that won Stanley Cups in the 10 year period between 06 and 15 (which hits the bulk of your examples) - in those 10 years, IMO 60% of the cup winners had very good to elite goaltending, with exception being the Hurricanes and 3x Blackhawks. JSG, Osgood, Fleury, Thomas, Quick x2 in my opinion were all key factors in their teams winning the cup, and those teams would NOT have won cups with out them.

Point being, it is rare to win without elite goaltending, just like it is rare for elite goaltending to be enough with out an elite team in front, you need it all. Often teams that win without elite goaltending, also tend to get elite goaltending as "lighting in a bottle" for that playoff run. I think if you look at the time frame above the Blackhawks are the example of winning without elite goaltending, and they over came it with such a strong group in front (essentially, what Edmonton is hoping to do with the McD and Drai combo).

Anyway, I think unintentionally, you've spun the data to say Goaltending isn't as important as the others. But I think the answer typically is, you need it all to win in most cases, although you will always be able to see exceptions, in both directions.

[traptor]

if we blow our load on a Byram, how are we going to get talent upfront?

[dammage79]

Acquiring Byram for the Left side and moving Andersson to make room for Parekh and BRZ seems logical. Don't recall what the rumored ask was for Byram but I think it was a couple of 2nd rounders?

Maybe 32 and something else gets it done for CGY??

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by traptor

if we blow our load on a Byram, how are we going to get talent upfront?

Moving Razz

[Fan69]

Originally Posted by Ped

Because he'll be 35 in October.

He just had a thirty plus goal season. Thats first line numbers 30+ or not.

[PepsiFree]

Snag Byram and Mactavish and boom, you got your top five picks (one in the top three!).

Stanley Cup imminent.

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I think your end conclusion of "Investing in goaltending without a core of forwards/defense often leads to wasted prime years." is accurate. But it also works out in reverse as well IMO: investing in core forwards / defense without a elite goalie leads to wasted prime years.

You had a list of teams with IMO a range of good to elite goalies that failed to win the cup because of other roster deficiencies. I agree. But your list will be equally as long on teams with strong forward / defense cores who failed to win the cup because goaltending fell short. You just went looking for the examples in one direction.

Without doing the analysis, look at the goalies that won Stanley Cups in the 10 year period between 06 and 15 (which hits the bulk of your examples) - in those 10 years, IMO 60% of the cup winners had very good to elite goaltending, with exception being the Hurricanes and 3x Blackhawks. JSG, Osgood, Fleury, Thomas, Quick x2 in my opinion were all key factors in their teams winning the cup, and those teams would NOT have won cups with out them.

Point being, it is rare to win without elite goaltending, just like it is rare for elite goaltending to be enough with out an elite team in front, you need it all. Often teams that win without elite goaltending, also tend to get elite goaltending as "lighting in a bottle" for that playoff run. I think if you look at the time frame above the Blackhawks are the example of winning without elite goaltending, and they over came it with such a strong group in front (essentially, what Edmonton is hoping to do with the McD and Drai combo).

Anyway, I think unintentionally, you've spun the data to say Goaltending isn't as important as the others. But I think the answer typically is, you need it all to win in most cases, although you will always be able to see exceptions, in both directions.

I'm not saying goaltending isn't important, or that having an elite center or D and not having elite goaltending is preferable in the long run. What I'm saying and seemly what the stats confirm, is that teams that acquire the elite goalie before the elite D, Center, in the last 15 years during a retool or rebuild have not been successful. You need all pillars of the foundation but when you get the goalie first, it often means you cant successfully get the high picks you need to build up the rest of the foundation.


If you draft the center and D first, they don't prop you up as much or have the same impact of keeping you in the mushy middle like an elite goalie does.... Teams that get the goalie first statistically, have not been able to become consistent contenders as a result. Flames could buck the trend but the stats are against them.

The teams that won the cup either acquired the goalie after they already had the elite players or had consistent high picks even with the goalie. Of the teams that were in the mushy middle rebuilding that had an elite goalie, none of them became contenders... So unless they trade enough away to sink. The stats don't support this team becoming a consistent contender.

[Inferno]

You don't always need an elite goalie to win the Cup but you almost always need elite level goaltending in the playoffs to win. Sometimes you can get away with good with someone like Niemi.

When you get a young elite goalie like Wolf you don't just trade him hoping you can draft an elite center though.

The only exception would be if you either already have an elite goalie who isn't going anywhere anytime soon or you have another young elite goalie which would be rare.

[Ped]

Originally Posted by Fan69

He just had a thirty plus goal season. Thats first line numbers 30+ or not.

Agreed. But what is the likelihood of that continuing?

[Psytic]

Originally Posted by Inferno

You don't always need an elite goalie to win the Cup but you almost always need elite level goaltending in the playoffs to win. Sometimes you can get away with good with someone like Niemi.

When you get a young elite goalie like Wolf you don't just trade him hoping you can draft an elite center though.

The only exception would be if you either already have an elite goalie who isn't going anywhere anytime soon or you have another young elite goalie which would be rare.

You work with the hand you are dealt of course, but statistically it hasn't worked out when this happens is what the data is saying. Now if we trade Coleman, Andersson and maybe even someone else to sink enough to draft a 1C...things change, because they look like they already have the elite D in the pipe.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Psytic

I'm not saying goaltending isn't important, or that having an elite center or D and not having elite goaltending is preferable in the long run. What I'm saying and seemly what the stats confirm, is that teams that acquire the elite goalie before the elite D, Center, in the last 15 years during a retool or rebuild have not been successful. You need all pillars of the foundation but when you get the goalie first, it often means you cant successfully get the high picks you need to build up the rest of the foundation.


If you draft the center and D first, they don't prop you up as much or have the same impact of keeping you in the mushy middle like an elite goalie does.... Teams that get the goalie first statistically, have not been able to become consistent contenders as a result. Flames could buck the trend but the stats are against them.

The teams that won the cup either acquired the goalie after they already had the elite players or had consistent high picks even with the goalie. Of the teams that were in the mushy middle rebuilding that had an elite goalie, none of them became contenders... So unless they trade enough away to sink. The stats don't support this team becoming a consistent contender.

I'm not sure I agree with the conclusion you are drawing re: draft order of goaltending vs. centre. That said, you've taken the time to find those examples that back up your position, and I'm not going to find the time to get that specific to show examples in other direction, so for the time being, I'll accept the conclusion

But even if I accept the conclusion, I think your thoughts would apply to a decision that needs to be made. I.e. if the Flames had neither an elite Centre | elite D or elite G in the system and needed to acquire all 3, then how do they use that information. If we accept your thoughts: then they should prioritize drafting around a Centre, Defense, then goaltending, and I could accept that premise.

What I don't think I'd accept, is that because the Flames happened to hit on a late round pick and got elite goaltending, I don't buy into the premise that they should (for lack of a better analogy), throw that fish back into the ocean in exchange for incremental fishing rods to hope to catch the 1c in the ocean first. I think you keep the trophy fish you have, because those are hard to come by, and you work on finding the other pieces you need.

[Sandman]

Whatever happened to the rumours of the Kings putting Brandt Clarke on the block? Now there’s a kid I would back up the truck for.

[DeluxeMoustache]

I love goaltending. I think it’s important

And having said that, I don’t think it is as important as everyone thinks

Here are some Stanley cup winning goalies from the last 20 years, after the Roy and Brodeur and even Hasek retired


Cam Ward, Chris Osgood, Antti Niemi, Corey Crawford, Matt Murray are all guys that I do not think we found in the Vezina conversation, or would I even think of as much above average. Also guys like Darcy Kuemper and Adin Hill.

Binnington is interesting. He was lights out as a rookie and won, then was relatively unspectacular until a strong showing at 4 nations. Not a goalie they built around, but a rare instance of lightning in a bottle actually going the whole way

Vasi and Bob are both really good but play behind strong teams.

To me the team wins the Cup first and foremost.

Tough to argue otherwise