2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[Calgary4LIfe]

I am still very high on Honzek. I think he had become a bit too tentative after his injuries. There is no guarantee this won't happen again, but as he is filling out, hopefully he will trust his body more and be more engaged. So far, I see him doing this. This has been my one and only criticism of him in the last year.


I bet that he becomes an important part of the solution for the Flames. He has many really good attributes, and as he gains confidence and experience, I bet he starts taking noticeable steps. I think he gets sent down again when Pospisil returns, but that's ok. Having all of these talented kids playing together on the farm bodes well - get them to develop chemistry and feel comfortable with one another. It is a fantastic way to develop.


I just wish there weren't as many bodies up on the Flames so that these kids could get 5 game looks to help them develop.

[Sofa GM]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Based on?

He is average at a lot of things, not really elite at any. Flames against got lured by the Big=Good spell against. I think he ends up being a 3rd liner, but again that’s just my viewpoint.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Sofa GM

He is average at a lot of things, not really elite at any. Flames against got lured by the Big=Good spell against. I think he ends up being a 3rd liner, but again that’s just my viewpoint.

Big = good is a lazy, and tired, critique.

First of all, as unfathomable as it may be, size does matter in the NHL. If you had two players of similar attributes, age, and projections and one was 6’4” while the other was 5’10”, I’d go out on a limb and say 10/10 nhl GM’s would take the 6’4” player.

You can criticize other qualities of the player but suggesting the Flames took Honzek primarily on size is lame.

Further at pick 16 is it all that unreasonable for an organization like the Flames, who at times in their history have been quite conservative, not taken the swing on a guy like Honzek? What was his floor? What was his ceiling? You have to balance all these things. I think you can rest assured the Flsmrs didn’t just look at his profile and say ‘this Honzek kid is 6’4”, done.’

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Sofa GM

I think that is being very optimistic. I see almost zero upside with Honzek.

I've never been a big Honzek guy but he doesn't seem totally out of place in the NHL and has been a little snake bitten. This is part of the process breaking in young players. Prospects that hit the ground running are the exception, not the norm. A lot of the best players in today's NHL had a gradual curve. Lets not make this rebuild more difficult by expecting the prospects to instantly become difference makers in the NHL. It takes time and patience.

[dammage79]

I don't think we can quantify any flames players offensive capabilities with how the entire team is snake bitten and cannot finish some good chances.

Honzek on that front at least has something else going for him in that he's turning into a reliable PKer which at his age is a pretty big deal. Once the Flames offense finally gets rolling, then we can talk about who or why they're not good. Overall this has to be a pretty big wake up call for the coaches, there's way more firepower in this line up than what they've shown within the first ten games of the season.

[Royle9]

Very hard to quantify any offensive upside when the team plays the most defensive system leaguewide (or close to it) and still cant put up points.
You insert a few of our highly offensive guys onto a roster that's scoring and playing possession game and I think they look completely different.

What scares me is that in his post-game presser yesterday, someone asked Huska point blank about his shot quality:

"You seem to have the shot quantity, you're shooting more than them having the higher quantity, is quality the next part you have to work on?"

Huska - "Um.. no" - "For us we need to commit to going to the net harder, when you're not scoring goals you tend to be more perimeter, you have to be more consistent getting pucks towards the net and getting in there before you can move on to the other stuff"

Not surprising, but sheds some light on where he thinks the offence should come from which is what we've been discussing for a while now. Volume -> guys in front -> dirty area goals as the priority.

[Roko]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Very hard to quantify any offensive upside when the team plays the most defensive system leaguewide (or close to it) and still cant put up points.
You insert a few of our highly offensive guys onto a roster that's scoring and playing possession game and I think they look completely different.

What scares me is that in his post-game presser yesterday, someone asked Huska point blank about his shot quality:

"You seem to have the shot quantity, you're shooting more than them having the higher quantity, is quality the next part you have to work on?"

Huska - "Um.. no" - "For us we need to commit to going to the net harder, when you're not scoring goals you tend to be more perimeter, you have to be more consistent getting pucks towards the net and getting in there before you can move on to the other stuff"

Not surprising, but sheds some light on where he thinks the offence should come from which is what we've been discussing for a while now. Volume -> guys in front -> dirty area goals as the priority.

Tank commander Huska is just a nice version of Sutter

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Not surprising, but sheds some light on where he thinks the offence should come from which is what we've been discussing for a while now. Volume -> guys in front -> dirty area goals as the priority.

What’s the difference to you between “quality shots” and getting guys inside to ensure they aren’t just shooting from the perimeter?

[Badgers Nose]

IDK, for as long as I have watched hockey (long time) crashing the net to get goals has been a good thing; a surefire way to break a slump. It's punishing and hard to do.

Our guys are not beating anyone with their shots right now.

I don't see the problem with what Huska said.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

What’s the difference to you between “quality shots” and getting guys inside to ensure they aren’t just shooting from the perimeter?

One is holding the puck and trying to actually make passes to enter the scoring area and generate chances with east-west movement and royal road passes.

The other is just funneling pucks to the net from all areas and hoping you can get rebounds.

Both are perfectly fine approaches...kind of feels like the Flames have been trying the later for over two seasons now though...and we rank bottom 5 in the NHL under Huska in GF/60.

Kind of wish different players would have a bit of a different approach, I don't think crashing the net is going to be super effective for the Zary, Frost, and Sharangovich's of the world.

Works for Klapka, Farabee, etc which is probably why those guys look better / more effective in Huska's system.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

One is holding the puck and trying to actually make passes to enter the scoring area and generate chances with east-west movement and royal road passes.

The other is just funneling pucks to the net from all areas and hoping you can get rebounds.

How is the latter not the “perimeter” shots he’s saying are an issue?

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

How is the latter not the “perimeter” shots he’s saying are an issue?

He's saying the lack of traffic and crashing the net is the issue, not where the shots are coming from.

Aka the shots are fine but not working because the other players on the ice aren't generating traffic or getting to rebounds.

Which is a valid concern for sure.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

He's saying the lack of traffic and crashing the net is the issue, not where the shots are coming from.

Aka the shots are fine but not working because the other players on the ice aren't generating traffic or getting to rebounds.

Which is a valid concern for sure.

He expressly said perimeter play wasn't a good thing.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

He expressly said perimeter play wasn't a good thing.

Yeah but he also said he wasn't worried about the shot quality or volume.

He didn't say perimeter shots as the issue, it's the perimeter play that's the issue.

I interpreted him saying "Getting pucks towards the net" and "commit to going to the net harder" while also answering no to if he's worried about shot quality means that he's not worried about shot selection, he's worried there is not enough traffic or bodies around the net to get rebounds.

And he's not wrong, but that's different than trying to generate higher initial shot quality. It's shooting the puck and then playing for deflections or rebounds.

Things I'm not sure our mostly smaller forward group will excel at, but what works for Farabee, Coleman, and Klapka which is probably why they look more effective. Also why Huberdeau had to reinvent his game as a net front guy to work in this system.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

What’s the difference to you between “quality shots” and getting guys inside to ensure they aren’t just shooting from the perimeter?

Just shooting from the point and hoping for a rebound/tip isn't enough to win championships.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Just shooting from the point and hoping for a rebound/tip isn't enough to win championships.

Great, agreed, which is why I’m asking what the difference is between quality shots and getting guys inside to ensure they aren’t just shooting from the perimeter?

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Very hard to quantify any offensive upside when the team plays the most defensive system leaguewide (or close to it) and still cant put up points.

On a related note - the insanely passive PK that Huska and the coaching staff employ drives me absolutely nuts. Every time we're on the PP, almost all other teams are hounding our guys with more aggressive PK tactics and taking the man, rarely allowing us the time to set up properly and smothering our opportunities.

When we're on the PK, we just play an incredibly passive diamond formation, no checking or taking the man with the puck, and it seems like every other team moves/circulates that puck around our system with ease - which they of course, end up doing. Can't stand this.

Anyways, apologies - rant over haha!

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Great, agreed, which is why I’m asking what the difference is between quality shots and getting guys inside to ensure they aren’t just shooting from the perimeter?

Because he wants the shots from the perimeter, (his team stats suggest it) he just wants more traffic in front is how that sounded.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Royle9

Because he wants the shots from the perimeter, (his team stats suggest it) he just wants more traffic in front is how that sounded.

Or the team stats show his team doesn't have the skill to generate shots from better areas.

[Harry Lime]

I remember when Sutter employed a similar system, and then the top line just decided 'screw this' and started playing their way.

Just hope that this doesn't stunt Parekh and Coronato, the way that it stunted Hubey and Sharon.