2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[really?]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I think the trading of the remaining vets will happen at the natural times. I understand the argument to just do it now, but I think it will happen over time in the following approximate order

Rasmus: Before the season or during the season
Backlund: Potentially this TDL, depending on team performance and his desire to be a Flame forever v. chase a cup.
Coleman: This TDL or next TDL
Kadri: After this upcoming season, when he moves to a modified NTC (13 team list so it's still pretty restrictive)
Huberdeau: I still don't think his contract is moveable. He's here for the long haul.
Weegar: No real sense in moving him. He's a stabilizing force across the team, and if Backlund moves on, probably the next captain.

I think you’re right. At some point Backlund probably asks for a shot at a cup, and that becomes more clear as the deadline approaches. I suspect Kadri is a little less enamored with the direction of the team then most appear to assume, but he’s a professional and seems to be a team guy so he’s keeping that flame on a low burn, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see him moved by this year’s deadline.

[ColossusXIII]

To me, the urgency to tank these next couple years is three-pronged

1. There is elite talent at the top of the draft in 26 and 27. You don't go in expecting to get #1, but they're perfect years to have higher odds.

2. Wolf and Parekh set the timeline. It's painful to tank now, but delaying it would be even more devastating. We want to get to the other side of the pain with a couple more high caliber players as soon as possible, both so they can contribute meaningfully in the same window as our current big 2 and so the team can hopefully be back on the upswing and attractive when we need to retain all this drafted talent.

3. Veteran assets. While I love what Conroy's done so far (and I do think he went into last season expecting a top 5 pick), we still do have some veterans with significant trade value. Obviously trade protection is a thing and I have zero problem with the players exercising the rights they negotiated, but for any that can be moved it doesn't make sense for us to be holding depreciating assets at this stage in the life cycle.

It's true full rebuilds are unlikely to work (no strategy is going to have high odds of being the singular winner in a 32 team league), but they still work more often than half measures do.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Not during this rebuild... We aren't talking franchise history.

If the Flames draft 1 OA and 4OA in the next 2 years I would agree they have set them up for a good path forward/have good odds of coming out of the rebuild in a contenders path

And yes all of Toronto's best players are forwards. Its one of their main issues

Calgary drafted 4th and 6th at the same period as Toronto drafted Marner, Matthews and Nylander. Drafted Bennett before Nylander, in fact. Calgary also ended up with the guy drafted just after Marner. Obviously Calgary should have been a contender since they drafted high between 2013 and 2016.

Goals against per game - Toronto was 8th, just behind Florida. Defence wasn't their issue. And Tanev is one of their best players.

[Sylvanfan]

The other factor in trade timing and returns is salary retention. At this point the Flames have one committed slot used up. If they retain on Andersson and say Backlund that's the full allotment for this season which might make it harder to move Coleman and Kadri until next season.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

My sense, and anyone can correct this if I'm mis-representing things, is that "team tank" wants to see the Flames more proactively strip the team down, by removing some of the well performing vets...both to maximize the return of those assets and so that their 1st can be a higher one, including to maximize the chances of landing McKenna this year.

I think that's basically it?

I'll comment as I am one of the main pro proper rebuild (so probably called pro tank), and someone who doesn't think Conroy and/or the Flames as a whole are doing a great job so far at the rebuild.

I look at who will be with this team when they are most likely to start to compete, their age ranges, and the most valuable assets for the team

Going into last season the most valuable rebuilding assets for the Flames were #1 Wolf, #2 Parekh (Can be argue he has ascended to top valuable asset) and the Flames 2025 first round pick. (I can buy an argument Coranto or Zary heading into the season)

This first round pick had protection on it - meaning there was a risk of losing your 3rd most valuable rebuilding asset heading into last season.


The teams best players/core heading into last season were (age in brackets)

Kadri (34)
Coleman (33)
Backlund (36)
Weegar (31)
Andersson (28)
Huberdeau (32)
Sharangovich (27)

So if I look at a team starting a rebuild and looking 5 years out (2029-2030 season) when they could be emerging from a rebuild who of these best players do I want on the team / will be a core producer on the team?

The two youngest players on the list - Andersson and Sharagovich - were not signed long term. That means the Flames would be paying a premium for their prime years when they aren't contending and in 5 years more likely then not have a post prime player they are paying prime year $$ for who is less effective.

Backlund, Kadri, Huberdeau and Coleman will all be over 37 by that time. They certainly aren't getting better, are a depreciating asset, and won't be a core player.

Weegar is under a great long term contract but will be mid 30s when we are ready to compete.

So going into last season when I look at our core - I honestly don't see a single player who fit into the 5 year from now rebuild team. To me that's A - Big problem and B - The sign it most certainly is a rebuild not a retool.

Knowing this - who provides the most value in a trade / tradeable situation to accelerate a rebuild AND knowing our 2025 first rounder is our 3rd most valuable rebuild asset and has protection on it?

I would have ranked them as follows taking into consideration trade protections before last season.

1. Weegar
2. Andersson
3. Sharangovich (Was a pending UFA)
4. Coleman
5. Kadri
6. Backlund
7. Huberdeau

Now I actually would have loved to see the Flames attempt to trade Weegar for a haul - but 100% understand why they didn't.

But the handling of #2 and #3 on the list was not something I think helps this team long term.

I would rather have walked Shag's to the deadline and traded for picks (yes he had a poor year and wouldn't have returned a ton (For argument let's say a 2nd) but I don't see how he plays into the long term strategy of this team) and move Andersson

Would that have been enough for this team to finish bottom 10? I actually doubt it with how they played - but who knows.

NOTE: I do think the Flames thought they would be bottom 10 last year and that it was part of the plan - so maybe they weren't concerned with keeping the extra talent on the team.

The second rebuild part of last season I did not like was the Frost and Farabee trade. We effectively gave up a 2nd and 3rd for them. Value wise it's fine/arguably a win.

However - To me they are not young enough, good enough, or locked up long term cheap enough that it makes sense to add them now. In 5 years they are post apex. People say Farabee could become the next Coleman - But he's already an expensive Coleman light who isn't "young." Best case he develops into a Coleman, is 30 as we start to enter competitive years and needs a new contract? How does this help now or long term?

So in my perfect(ish) world last year the Flames would have traded Andersson, Shags, and not traded for Frost or Farabee

Assuming that made them bad enough for their own pick (let's say 10th overall for simplicity) the Flames would have entered the draft with

10th overall
16th overall
Two extra 2nds (Shags and Frost traded 2nd back)
An extra 3rd (Kuzmenko trade value)

and whatever they got for Andersson

That is what the draft capital should look like for a rebuilding team IMO. Especially if the Flames really are better and drafting and developing players.

If we are great at drafting that would be a competitive advantage we should lean into.

And if that team was struggling, maybe Coleman and or Kadri asks for a trade and you get more assets at the deadline. Maybe we get to Colorado deal for Kadri.

Now I see the argument you can always trade Coleman next year, Kadri when trade protection gone, Frost in the future, etc. 100% true. However a few things to consider

1. Kadri, Colemans, etc of the world are getting older and can go from asset with value to no value asset (or low) very quickly.

2. If you are planning to trade at some point anyways - why not rip the bandaid off and get to it. They are a depreciating asset AND making the teams 1st rounders worse.

3. If you trade them if future years you are putting off the timeline of the returns joining to team X years. A guy drafted in the 2026 late first isn't making the NHL until 2031 in all likelihood (if at all)

4. They make the team better. This hurts a rebuilding teams most important asset - Their own 1st rounder.

Heading into 2026 one of the Flames most valuable rebuilding asset is the 2026 pick. But again it is a unknown value asset depending where you draft

If the Flames finish 16-20th again next year, trade Andersson for a 1st + scraps, and that's it - In my opinion the last 2 years will have been nothing short of a disaster for a proper rebuild.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Calgary drafted 4th and 6th at the same period as Toronto drafted Marner, Matthews and Nylander. Drafted Bennett before Nylander, in fact. Calgary also ended up with the guy drafted just after Marner. Obviously Calgary should have been a contender since they drafted high between 2013 and 2016.

Goals against per game - Toronto was 8th, just behind Florida. Defence wasn't their issue. And Tanev is one of their best players.

If Flames still had MT , Bennett and JG, and a Monahan we wouldn't be talking about a rebuild at all, so not sure the fact Toronto drafted their core at the same time has any relevance. We lost ours. We need a new one. And the Flames were a contender with those guys. It was just too short a window because of a few circumstances.

The Flames need to rebuild because their core left. Not because their drafted core is still here.

And the Flames can sign a 34 UFA D once they get their core. Again no clue how Tanev plays into the Leafs rebuild and how they formed their team. The Flames actually signed younger Tanev after drafting their core. That's exactly what emerging teams should be doing ONCE they have.... their core

[Bingo]

I get the rip it up and go to the studs argument.

But I also don't assign zero value to culture / bringing up young players with guidance and not in a tire fire.

The Flames aren't stubbornly hanging on to every veteran; they've moved many and look set to make an asset management move with Andersson.

I won't be upset if they pivot to a full rebuild, but I would be worried about hurting the development of some of the young players by bringing them into a terrible environment.

Can we agree the development environment angle has some value?

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I get the rip it up and go to the studs argument.

But I also don't assign zero value to culture / bringing up young players with guidance and not in a tire fire.

The Flames aren't stubbornly hanging on to every veteran; they've moved many and look set to make an asset management move with Andersson.

I won't be upset if they pivot to a full rebuild, but I would be worried about hurting the development of some of the young players by bringing them into a terrible environment.

Can we agree the development environment angle has some value?

100% - but would Huberdeau , Weegar and Backlund not be enough (who actually knows )

And at what point does a player need to transition into that role vs mentee?

I think most teams have good development and culture - it’s the few that don’t that scare people and I think it’s overblown because of the extreme cases of Incompetence.

Part of the Flames biggest issue is we don’t have any home grown 25- 30 year old range players that should be making this transition since our drafting and development (and trading picks) was poor or we traded the players

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

I'll comment as I am one of the main pro proper rebuild (so probably called pro tank), and someone who doesn't think Conroy and/or the Flames as a whole are doing a great job so far at the rebuild.

*Snip.
Just wanted to say that I appreciate the thoughtful and detailed response. This is the type of thing that allows for meaningful debate and discussion.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

100% - but would Huberdeau , Weegar and Backlund not be enough (who actually knows )

And at what point does a player need to transition into that role vs mentee?

I think most teams have good development and culture - it’s the few that don’t that scare people and I think it’s overblown because of the extreme cases of Incompetence.

Part of the Flames biggest issue is we don’t have any home grown 25- 30 year old range players that should be making this transition since our drafting and development (and trading picks) was poor or we traded the players

Yeah it's hard to know who and how many.

One one hand I think Kadri, Weegar and Andersson are key because they are still top of roster players.

But Backlund and Coleman provide that right way to play angle and Backlund is mentioned often by young players as being a huge influence.

Huberdeau seems to be liked by many but not sure he's as important (complete guess by me) and isn't moveable anyway.

I'd assume they know, and that's why they have done what they've done (not trading everyone), but it could be a wrong assumption and they have more room (shedding more veterans) than the've tolerated.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by ColossusXIII

To me, the urgency to tank these next couple years is three-pronged

1. There is elite talent at the top of the draft in 26 and 27. You don't go in expecting to get #1, but they're perfect years to have higher odds.

2. Wolf and Parekh set the timeline. It's painful to tank now, but delaying it would be even more devastating. We want to get to the other side of the pain with a couple more high caliber players as soon as possible, both so they can contribute meaningfully in the same window as our current big 2 and so the team can hopefully be back on the upswing and attractive when we need to retain all this drafted talent.

3. Veteran assets. While I love what Conroy's done so far (and I do think he went into last season expecting a top 5 pick), we still do have some veterans with significant trade value. Obviously trade protection is a thing and I have zero problem with the players exercising the rights they negotiated, but for any that can be moved it doesn't make sense for us to be holding depreciating assets at this stage in the life cycle.

It's true full rebuilds are unlikely to work (no strategy is going to have high odds of being the singular winner in a 32 team league), but they still work more often than half measures do.

Yes!
They should have started before last season, but it doesn't matter now. The best time was yesterday, and today is as good as tomorrow. But the longer we wait the worse it will be, and if we do nothing it has less chance of working out. There's no guaranteed way to build a contender but intentionally stripping and rebuilding instead of half measures seems way more reasonable.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by ColossusXIII

To me, the urgency to tank these next couple years is three-pronged

1. There is elite talent at the top of the draft in 26 and 27. You don't go in expecting to get #1, but they're perfect years to have higher odds.

2. Wolf and Parekh set the timeline. It's painful to tank now, but delaying it would be even more devastating. We want to get to the other side of the pain with a couple more high caliber players as soon as possible, both so they can contribute meaningfully in the same window as our current big 2 and so the team can hopefully be back on the upswing and attractive when we need to retain all this drafted talent.

3. Veteran assets. While I love what Conroy's done so far (and I do think he went into last season expecting a top 5 pick), we still do have some veterans with significant trade value. Obviously trade protection is a thing and I have zero problem with the players exercising the rights they negotiated, but for any that can be moved it doesn't make sense for us to be holding depreciating assets at this stage in the life cycle.

It's true full rebuilds are unlikely to work (no strategy is going to have high odds of being the singular winner in a 32 team league), but they still work more often than half measures do.

Yes!
They should have started before last season, but it doesn't matter now. The best time was yesterday, and today is better than tomorrow. But the longer we wait the worse it will be, and if we do nothing it has less chance of working out. There's no guaranteed way to build a contender but intentionally stripping and rebuilding instead of half measures seems way more reasonable.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

I'll comment as I am one of the main pro proper rebuild (so probably called pro tank), and someone who doesn't think Conroy and/or the Flames as a whole are doing a great job so far at the rebuild.

I look at who will be with this team when they are most likely to start to compete, their age ranges, and the most valuable assets for the team

Going into last season the most valuable rebuilding assets for the Flames were #1 Wolf, #2 Parekh (Can be argue he has ascended to top valuable asset) and the Flames 2025 first round pick. (I can buy an argument Coranto or Zary heading into the season)

This first round pick had protection on it - meaning there was a risk of losing your 3rd most valuable rebuilding asset heading into last season.


The teams best players/core heading into last season were (age in brackets)

Kadri (34)
Coleman (33)
Backlund (36)
Weegar (31)
Andersson (28)
Huberdeau (32)
Sharangovich (27)

So if I look at a team starting a rebuild and looking 5 years out (2029-2030 season) when they could be emerging from a rebuild who of these best players do I want on the team / will be a core producer on the team?

The two youngest players on the list - Andersson and Sharagovich - were not signed long term. That means the Flames would be paying a premium for their prime years when they aren't contending and in 5 years more likely then not have a post prime player they are paying prime year $$ for who is less effective.

Backlund, Kadri, Huberdeau and Coleman will all be over 37 by that time. They certainly aren't getting better, are a depreciating asset, and won't be a core player.

Weegar is under a great long term contract but will be mid 30s when we are ready to compete.

So going into last season when I look at our core - I honestly don't see a single player who fit into the 5 year from now rebuild team. To me that's A - Big problem and B - The sign it most certainly is a rebuild not a retool.

Knowing this - who provides the most value in a trade / tradeable situation to accelerate a rebuild AND knowing our 2025 first rounder is our 3rd most valuable rebuild asset and has protection on it?

I would have ranked them as follows taking into consideration trade protections before last season.

1. Weegar
2. Andersson
3. Sharangovich (Was a pending UFA)
4. Coleman
5. Kadri
6. Backlund
7. Huberdeau

Now I actually would have loved to see the Flames attempt to trade Weegar for a haul - but 100% understand why they didn't.

But the handling of #2 and #3 on the list was not something I think helps this team long term.

I would rather have walked Shag's to the deadline and traded for picks (yes he had a poor year and wouldn't have returned a ton (For argument let's say a 2nd) but I don't see how he plays into the long term strategy of this team) and move Andersson

Would that have been enough for this team to finish bottom 10? I actually doubt it with how they played - but who knows.

NOTE: I do think the Flames thought they would be bottom 10 last year and that it was part of the plan - so maybe they weren't concerned with keeping the extra talent on the team.

The second rebuild part of last season I did not like was the Frost and Farabee trade. We effectively gave up a 2nd and 3rd for them. Value wise it's fine/arguably a win.

However - To me they are not young enough, good enough, or locked up long term cheap enough that it makes sense to add them now. In 5 years they are post apex. People say Farabee could become the next Coleman - But he's already an expensive Coleman light who isn't "young." Best case he develops into a Coleman, is 30 as we start to enter competitive years and needs a new contract? How does this help now or long term?

So in my perfect(ish) world last year the Flames would have traded Andersson, Shags, and not traded for Frost or Farabee

Assuming that made them bad enough for their own pick (let's say 10th overall for simplicity) the Flames would have entered the draft with

10th overall
16th overall
Two extra 2nds (Shags and Frost traded 2nd back)
An extra 3rd (Kuzmenko trade value)

and whatever they got for Andersson

That is what the draft capital should look like for a rebuilding team IMO. Especially if the Flames really are better and drafting and developing players.

If we are great at drafting that would be a competitive advantage we should lean into.

And if that team was struggling, maybe Coleman and or Kadri asks for a trade and you get more assets at the deadline. Maybe we get to Colorado deal for Kadri.

Now I see the argument you can always trade Coleman next year, Kadri when trade protection gone, Frost in the future, etc. 100% true. However a few things to consider

1. Kadri, Colemans, etc of the world are getting older and can go from asset with value to no value asset (or low) very quickly.

2. If you are planning to trade at some point anyways - why not rip the bandaid off and get to it. They are a depreciating asset AND making the teams 1st rounders worse.

3. If you trade them if future years you are putting off the timeline of the returns joining to team X years. A guy drafted in the 2026 late first isn't making the NHL until 2031 in all likelihood (if at all)

4. They make the team better. This hurts a rebuilding teams most important asset - Their own 1st rounder.

Heading into 2026 one of the Flames most valuable rebuilding asset is the 2026 pick. But again it is a unknown value asset depending where you draft

If the Flames finish 16-20th again next year, trade Andersson for a 1st + scraps, and that's it - In my opinion the last 2 years will have been nothing short of a disaster for a proper rebuild.

This is a very good post and I can't disagree with any of it.

And while Conroy will trade UFA's to be that won't sign team friendly deals, I believe his mandate is to try and win as many games a year. as possible. Trading Kadri makes sense for the long term outlook of the team. But as long as he wants to stay, Calgary is willing to keep him until the last year of his deal.

[PepsiFree]

From interviews with younger guys I’ve heard names like Kadri, Weegar, and Lomberg pop up as playing big roles in helping the young guys along directly. Backlund often gets acknowledged as setting the culture tone, but I haven’t read anything about him taking anybody under his wing. Haven’t heard much regarding Andersson or Coleman, and obviously we all know Huberdeau and Pelletier had a strong connection, but outside of that who knows.

I don’t know what (if anything) there is to take from that. I’m sure other players have mentioned others. But I think a veteran presence, especially of those guys who are happy to help the young guys directly and guys who have won it all before is really valued by those young players.

I think more than just veterans, it’s important to have a few veterans that have either been with the team a while, are going to be with the team a while, or have won a cup (or some combination of the three).

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

This is a very good post and I can't disagree with any of it.

And while Conroy will trade UFA's to be that won't sign team friendly deals, I believe his mandate is to try and win as many games a year. as possible. Trading Kadri makes sense for the long term outlook of the team. But as long as he wants to stay, Calgary is willing to keep him until the last year of his deal.

Carried $20M of cap space into last season.
Traded their #1 goaltender 2 years before contract expiry
Didn't add at the deadline despite being in contention
Didn't sign anyone this summer

For a team that has always spent to the cap until last season this "win as many games as possible" mandate just doesn't hold water.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Carried $20M of cap space into last season.
Traded their #1 goaltender 2 years before contract expiry
Didn't add at the deadline despite being in contention
Didn't sign anyone this summer

For a team that has always spent to the cap until last season this "win as many games as possible mandate just doesn't hold water.

That suggestion always loses me for the reasons you listed.

No GM trades as many top of the lineup players as Conroy has, signs as few players, and carries as much cap as the Flames have if there is a mandate to win as many games as possible.

If that’s Conroy’s mandate and that’s what he’s trying to do then he might be the worst GM in the entire league and the luckiest.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

This is a very good post and I can't disagree with any of it.

And while Conroy will trade UFA's to be that won't sign team friendly deals, I believe his mandate is to try and win as many games a year. as possible. Trading Kadri makes sense for the long term outlook of the team. But as long as he wants to stay, Calgary is willing to keep him until the last year of his deal.

It's hard to see the mandate right now, IMO.

They've done almost nothing to improve, short of Frost/Farabee. And they've made moves for futures in most of their pending UFA trades.

There also seems to be resistance to going down to the studs, and appetite to be competitive to coincide with new arena.

I think this approach will leave for some dissatisfied owners at the end of the day, because resistance to move some of the diminishing assets may make it more painful (and longer) than it needed to be.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

That suggestion always loses me for the reasons you listed.

No GM trades as many top of the lineup players as Conroy has, signs as few players, and carries as much cap as the Flames have if there is a mandate to win as many games as possible.

If that’s Conroy’s mandate and that’s what he’s trying to do then he might be the worst GM in the entire league and the luckiest.

And flush with draft picks they stand down at the trade deadline despite being tied for the final playoff spot on the even of the deadline.

I mean that doesn't even require an optimistic view ... they were right there and added zilch.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Carried $20M of cap space into last season.
Traded their #1 goaltender 2 years before contract expiry
Didn't add at the deadline despite being in contention
Didn't sign anyone this summer

For a team that has always spent to the cap until last season this "win as many games as possible" mandate just doesn't hold water.

I get this.

Markstrom was traded because they had Wolf ready to take over. I think that was a special case.

Carried $20M worth of cap space because there was no one really to spend it on. Same for UFA's this summer. Conroy isn't going to sign long term contracts that he thinks will stink at the end. But he's also made offers to Andersson, Hanifin, Lindholm. That's not what a rebuilding team would have done.

I think Conroy was largely forced into the things on your list.

I believe he would have signed Marner if he was available to Calgary.

I guess I agree that he's not trying to win "at all costs". But he's not doing what is in the best interest of the franchise long term by hanging on to vets while their value decreases.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Robbob

This is exactly where I think the Flames can be. You have 24 kids drafted over the last 3 years. There is a lot to be excited for as the Flames more than likely also still get that top 10 pick in the next couple years. If they don't, then they are still adding multiple 1st round picks in the next few drafts to the prospect pool. Building a contender is about amassing and developing talent. I think it is too early to tell where the Flames land as it may take a couple years to see what comes out of the pile of picks.

The only way this team doesn't have 1-2 top 5 picks is if the current prospects hit on the higher end of their potential in a majority of the prospects or the vets play at a high level later than expected.

If Ras is traded soon, it's another sign that Conroy moves vets out as prospects take the spot on the team.

Kadri is still here as we don't have anyone that 100% is stealing his spot.

We have a ton on wingers. I do believe Conroy has had discussions to address that is trade talks involving guys like Byram or other talks. Just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it won't. Still lots of summer left