2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Everyone says the Buffalo lineup is good. But then claims the GM is bad. Aside from mishandling Eichel (admittedly a huge black mark), what other things were done that make Adams bad? Pusruing a tank strategy? Not being able to convince guys to stick around?

Has he won a trade or at least made a trade where it worked out okay for them? Remember he picked the Knights in the Eichel trade over offers from teams like the Flames because he really like Krebs. How's that working out? Sold low on Reinhart. Sold low on Cozens. The Peterka trade looks like his best to date, getting a solid defensemen in Kesselring but I wouldn't call that a homerun. If you really go down the list of moves he's made, it's not very inspiring and the reason people say the roster is good is because they have been drafting exclusively between top 15 and first overall for over a decade and bad organizations can fail themselves into accumulating talent.

[Funkhouser]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Everyone says the Buffalo lineup is good. But then claims the GM is bad. Aside from mishandling Eichel (admittedly a huge black mark), what other things were done that make Adams bad? Pusruing a tank strategy? Not being able to convince guys to stick around?

I would say his biggest errors (outside of Eichel) are:
-coaching hires (one of Treliving's biggest issues while here, so we can empathize).
-drafting the same type of player, leading to gaps in the system that had to be reinforced elsewhere.
-Being too patient & afraid to make big swings...he rarely addresses obvious issues during the off-season and tends to make incremental changes to address issues (goaltending, lack of veteran leadership, bottom six depth, RD, etc). By the time he has addressed the issue, others appear.
-Always prioritizing prospects over the present...for a team with as many high draft picks and prospect depth, they are reluctant to use it to shore up their elite talent and make an immediate difference. They could have easily surrounded Tage, Dahlin, etc with other young stars by trading some prospect depth and draft picks, but are unwilling to do so. A good GM knows when it is time to jump in - Adams never does.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Everyone says the Buffalo lineup is good. But then claims the GM is bad. Aside from mishandling Eichel (admittedly a huge black mark), what other things were done that make Adams bad? Pusruing a tank strategy? Not being able to convince guys to stick around?

Just because you trade players for draft picks and prospect doesn't mean you have to start the tank all over again.

Peterka, Cozens and Eichel all got lessor returns because the Sabres only want players that can help them now. So, you take lessor returns trying to win trading some of your best players? Very hard to do.

If you traded these guys and loaded up on prospects and picks rather than Doan, Kesselring, Krebs, Norris and so on, maybe they can land a young star to replace the players they lost. Players before UFA status can't have trade protection. McTavish could have been available. Rossi could have been moved this off season. Dobson was available.

None of these players could be had for Norris, Kesselring, Doan and Krebs as a package. If Buffalo had a bunch of extra picks and prospects, they could have loaded up for young players available.

Buffalo still has a good core to build around, and I get why they want depth to help that core succeed now, but you can't trade your best players for depth only and ignore adding good value with that depth.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

Just because you trade players for draft picks and prospect doesn't mean you have to start the tank all over again.

Peterka, Cozens and Eichel all got lessor returns because the Sabres only want players that can help them now. So, you take lessor returns trying to win trading some of your best players? Very hard to do.

If you traded these guys and loaded up on prospects and picks rather than Doan, Kesselring, Krebs, Norris and so on, maybe they can land a young star to replace the players they lost. Players before UFA status can't have trade protection. McTavish could have been available. Rossi could have been moved this off season. Dobson was available.

None of these players could be had for Norris, Kesselring, Doan and Krebs as a package. If Buffalo had a bunch of extra picks and prospects, they could have loaded up for young players available.

Buffalo still has a good core to build around, and I get why they want depth to help that core succeed now, but you can't trade your best players for depth only and ignore adding good value with that depth.

Eichel got one each of a player (Tuch), a prospect (Krebs), a first and a second round pick. Seems rebuildish to me. You can argue with the package but the closest anyone got was Calgary who offered something similar.

Cozens got two highly regarded youngish players (both first round picks). And Cozens has done fairly little in Ottawa. IU have no idea what the other offers were.

Peterka got a great young Dman (almost as good as Dobson) and Doan.

[GioforPM]

Macho says Buffalo only traded for "help now" and Funkhouser says they only got prospects. Funny.

[Royle9]

I mean the biggest knock against Adams is the fact he's been comfortable "rebuilding" for what seems like a decade.

No advancement, no success, coaching carousel.

Add in the terrible trades, terrible dressing room/aura around the team for years and its just a cesspool of failures.

[Funkhouser]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Macho says Buffalo only traded for "help now" and Funkhouser says they only got prospects. Funny.

Not quite, they prioritize the future value of their prospects/picks rather than converting them into present value assets.

I mean they traded Savoie for a present day asset...but imagine what they could have got for a top ten pick if they had traded it earlier? What could they have traded the #1 pick (power) into? What about Rosen, Ostlund, Wahlberg, Helenius, Kulick, etc. All these first round picks could have been packaged into immediate support for their current core.

Montreal traded two mid-round firsts for a top pairing D this summer, beginning to fill out the holes in their roster. That is what a team should be doing once their core begins to be established.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Funkhouser

Not quite, they prioritize the future value of their prospects/picks rather than converting them into present value assets.

I mean they traded Savoie for a present day asset...but imagine what they could have got for a top ten pick if they had traded it earlier? What could they have traded the #1 pick (power) into? What about Rosen, Ostlund, Wahlberg, Helenius, Kulick, etc. All these first round picks could have been packaged into immediate support for their current core.

Montreal traded two mid-round firsts for a top pairing D this summer, beginning to fill out the holes in their roster. That is what a team should be doing once their core begins to be established.

It’s what the Flames are going to have to start doing in a year or two.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Funkhouser

Not quite, they prioritize the future value of their prospects/picks rather than converting them into present value assets.

I mean they traded Savoie for a present day asset...but imagine what they could have got for a top ten pick if they had traded it earlier? What could they have traded the #1 pick (power) into? What about Rosen, Ostlund, Wahlberg, Helenius, Kulick, etc. All these first round picks could have been packaged into immediate support for their current core.

Montreal traded two mid-round firsts for a top pairing D this summer, beginning to fill out the holes in their roster. That is what a team should be doing once their core begins to be established.

Still, it's funny that your perspectives differ as to the aim.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

Just because you trade players for draft picks and prospect doesn't mean you have to start the tank all over again.

Peterka, Cozens and Eichel all got lessor returns because the Sabres only want players that can help them now. So, you take lessor returns trying to win trading some of your best players? Very hard to do.

If you traded these guys and loaded up on prospects and picks rather than Doan, Kesselring, Krebs, Norris and so on, maybe they can land a young star to replace the players they lost. Players before UFA status can't have trade protection. McTavish could have been available. Rossi could have been moved this off season. Dobson was available.

None of these players could be had for Norris, Kesselring, Doan and Krebs as a package. If Buffalo had a bunch of extra picks and prospects, they could have loaded up for young players available.

Buffalo still has a good core to build around, and I get why they want depth to help that core succeed now, but you can't trade your best players for depth only and ignore adding good value with that depth.

I don't see how if you trade your #1 center and #1 dman you are doing anything that is not re-building.

Yes some of those guys were available but almost all needed contracts. Take Dobson - his new deal with Montreal included 7 UFA years. Was he going to sign a deal like that in Buffalo?

The Sabres in a tough spot. They are probably the least desirable place to play, have been out of the playoffs for 14 years, royally f'd up their franchise player, and now potentially have two more that want out.

And if TT and Dahlin ask out, how do you prevent the dominoes from falling further with others also asking to get out.

It's an utter disaster.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I don't see how if you trade your #1 center and #1 dman you are doing anything that is not re-building.

Yes some of those guys were available but almost all needed contracts. Take Dobson - his new deal with Montreal included 7 UFA years. Was he going to sign a deal like that in Buffalo?

The Sabres in a tough spot. They are probably the least desirable place to play, have been out of the playoffs for 14 years, royally f'd up their franchise player, and now potentially have two more that want out.

And if TT and Dahlin ask out, how do you prevent the dominoes from falling further with others also asking to get out.

It's an utter disaster.

It is definitely a potential outcome of any rebuild. Committing an organization to losing raises the distinct possibility that you perfect being a loser. It had pretty much happened in Edmonton as well until they lucked out and got McDavid.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Eichel got one each of a player (Tuch), a prospect (Krebs), a first and a second round pick. Seems rebuildish to me. You can argue with the package but the closest anyone got was Calgary who offered something similar.

Cozens got two highly regarded youngish players (both first round picks). And Cozens has done fairly little in Ottawa. IU have no idea what the other offers were.

Peterka got a great young Dman (almost as good as Dobson) and Doan.

Eichel did not have trade protection. Krebs was a highly rated prospect, but Vegas 1st was destined to be late. Clearly Buffalo valued Tuch in that deal.

Flames didn't have much better to offer.

But they could have traded Eichel who had 5 years left on his deal to any team in the league. That trade was a head was bad from day 1 and it was because they limited their options by valuing the players over the picks.

I don't care if Norris is a 1st round pick. He is 26/27 and had major injuries. Bernard Docker wasn't even offered a QO and Norris is gone until xmas. Ottawa got a 2nd with Cozens who makes less than Norris. That is a very bad deal.

I'm not suggesting they trade Peterka for Dobson, I was just listing young players that were traded in recent years that did not have trade protection and were traded for picks. Picks are easier to trade when you have extra like say Montreal did when they acquired Dobson. When you don't have extra picks and your pick is top 10, it's harder to trade a 1st. But if you have 2 or 3 firsts, now you can make a move as you still could get the guys you want in the draft with the additional picks. Montreal still drafted 34OV and had 9 picks after the trade.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

It is definitely a potential outcome of any rebuild. Committing an organization to losing raises the distinct possibility that you perfect being a loser. It had pretty much happened in Edmonton as well until they lucked out and got McDavid.

The Sabres even lucked out in getting a franchise center in Eichel.
And they f'd that up.

That's the tipping point. Eichel was a guy to build around on and off the ice, including to draw other players there.

Them pushing him out, including by not allowing him to have some say in how to handle his health issues, pushed them to this point.

It doesn't get talked about enough in terms of how BAD that screwed that up. The trade was meh. But the issue isn't the trade, it's what led to the trade.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The Sabres even lucked out in getting a franchise center in Eichel.
And they f'd that up.

That's the tipping point. Eichel was a guy to build around on and off the ice, including to draw other players there.

Them pushing him out, including by not allowing him to have some say in how to handle his health issues, pushed them to this point.

It doesn't get talked about enough in terms of how BAD that screwed that up. The trade was meh. But the issue isn't the trade, it's what led to the trade.

I agree that it kind of got forgotten, but I will say that the Sabres poor handling of the relationship with Eichel was WIDELY reported and discussed during the trade process. Around here we were all dunking on the sabres repeatedly for not allowing the surgery. There were a few who were pushing back on its "experimental" nature vis a vis hockey players, but ultimately thats an even more insane dunning-kruger moment than the rest of us armchair GMs usually present lol.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

Eichel did not have trade protection..

Are we not seeing that players don't need formal trade protection to have a heavy hand in where they will go and not go?

[Funkhouser]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Still, it's funny that your perspectives differ as to the aim.

{edit, no idea how to embed a gif, any help??}

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

I agree that it kind of got forgotten, but I will say that the Sabres poor handling of the relationship with Eichel was WIDELY reported and discussed during the trade process. Around here we were all dunking on the sabres repeatedly for not allowing the surgery. There were a few who were pushing back on its "experimental" nature vis a vis hockey players, but ultimately thats an even more insane dunning-kruger moment than the rest of us armchair GMs usually present lol.

Agreed talked about a lot in advance of the trade, but I'm saying it's not talked enough now about the tipping point for that franchise.

I mean they even stripped him of the C in fall of that year. Why? What did they think that was going to do?

Instead of trying to save the relationship they doubled down.
Idiots.

[Matty81]

Yeah I think Eichel was the tipping point there as well in their rebuild producing a playoff/contending team vs what they have. I mean they are 117-109 over the last 3 years and I do think a better coach could push them into a playoff spot with the roster they have. But they're not contending for a cup either, kind of rebuilt into no mans land which is pretty awful after 12 years out of the playoffs. But sometimes it just takes a good coach and a couple final pieces to push a team like that into the next tier.

Florida made the playoffs twice in 18 years until fairly recently - and they had seemingly rebuilt into a pretty average team until the last few years, they seemed to be picking in the 9-15 range every season for a bit after they did their dive and picked up 3 or 4 top five picks. Not that Buffalo has a Barkov though probably the big difference.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

The Sabres even lucked out in getting a franchise center in Eichel.
And they f'd that up.

That's the tipping point. Eichel was a guy to build around on and off the ice, including to draw other players there.

Them pushing him out, including by not allowing him to have some say in how to handle his health issues, pushed them to this point.

It doesn't get talked about enough in terms of how BAD that screwed that up. The trade was meh. But the issue isn't the trade, it's what led to the trade.

That is true, it is just a commitment to losing can often lead to being a loser. Columbus has picked 3, 4, 6, 5, 3 over the past 10 years and will almost certainly get another lottery pick this year. Losing can often beget losing.

[Monahammer]

Speaking of the BJs, you have to think Cole Sillinger is on the outs there. They have Monahan, Jenner, Fantili and now Coyle all taking centre reps away from him.

Not sure what we could trade but I really want him still. He wasn't given the right start there.