2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Bingo

They could take the two wins, add three more and still need to finish on a 101 point pace to get to the current playoff cut off point.

I think they need to be very bad for the org to really think about parting with Kadri. I think the Flames entered this season with expectations they will be on the bubble. Their games before Thanksgiving include matchups with the Blues, Wild, Hawks 2x, Sabres, and Sharks.

They could be .500 at Thanksgiving and after the start they had I think they step back from any move that would be unplanned due to the nightmare start. I could be wrong but following this team it is hard to see them operate differently. If they continue to struggle and lose games it is more likely to force theirs or the players hands to ask for a change

[Ped]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Strange! So NHL contracts are different from normal contracts?

Not a surprise. I always thought a few of the complaints Jim Balsillie made against the league were right back in his ‘sue my way to a franchise in Hamilton’ phase. NHL does have some mafia-like rules for sure.

Actually it didn't used to be this way. Players could often demand to renegotiate their contract; the most well-known that I remember was Nik Khabibulin, but there were more.


It was removed after the 2004 lockout. Part of the reason for it was because the cap was introduced and it would have been a way to circumvent it.

[Jiri Hrdina]

I agree that the Flames don't often trade good players with term (more than 1 year) remaining on their deal, including for just futures. But that's not unique to the Flames. That's pretty common. Teams rarely trade off good players, with term remaining, without getting good players back.

The Flames lack top end players. Kadri is arguably their best player (skater). So we shouldn't be surprise there is some apprehension and caution in trading him.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

It's funny is it?

I'm not pretending to not know anything. The relevance is that Conroy has not shown a proclivity to move guys in the middle of their contract. Players that have been traded has generally been because they were approaching an inflection point. I don't see how that is doing things against their will.

No GM has this "proclivity". Because the end of contracts are generally when players are easier to move, and when the best value is achieved. There are exceptions but they don't make the rule, and often reflect unhappiness with the player versus some sort of proactive rebuilding process. The Sharks only made one such deal that I can think of (Karlsson). The Flames have done more than that. I can't recall any by Chicago (in fact they acquired Seth Jones). I don't think the Ducks did.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Ped

Actually it didn't used to be this way. Players could often demand to renegotiate their contract; the most well-known that I remember was Nik Khabibulin, but there were more.


It was removed after the 2004 lockout. Part of the reason for it was because the cap was introduced and it would have been a way to circumvent it.

Except that modifying trade clauses in no way circumvents the cap. I can see not amending salaries.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Ped

Actually it didn't used to be this way. Players could often demand to renegotiate their contract; the most well-known that I remember was Nik Khabibulin, but there were more.


It was removed after the 2004 lockout. Part of the reason for it was because the cap was introduced and it would have been a way to circumvent it.

The only thing I would like to see is a contract extension cap smoothing.

Lets say you have a rookie on the last year of his ELC at $1M, and you want to extend him at 7 x $8M.

I think the team should be given the option to blend those contracts - making it $7.125 against the cap for the 8 years he has signed.

Makes it good for rebuilding teams who have lots of cap now but will want extra space later.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I agree that the Flames don't often trade good players with term (more than 1 year) remaining on their deal, including for just futures. But that's not unique to the Flames. That's pretty common. Teams rarely trade off good players, with term remaining, without getting good players back.

The Flames lack top end players. Kadri is arguably their best player (skater). So we shouldn't be surprise there is some apprehension and caution in trading him.

I'd love someone to make a list of top 6 players being traded with term.

[Burning Beard]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I think they need to be very bad for the org to really think about parting with Kadri. I think the Flames entered this season with expectations they will be on the bubble. Their games before Thanksgiving include matchups with the Blues, Wild, Hawks 2x, Sabres, and Sharks.

They could be .500 at Thanksgiving and after the start they had I think they step back from any move that would be unplanned due to the nightmare start. I could be wrong but following this team it is hard to see them operate differently. If they continue to struggle and lose games it is more likely to force theirs or the players hands to ask for a change

Or maybe if they get some wins their assets look better after those games and teams aren't circling like sharks in the water hoping for rock bottom prices?

We don't know for sure either way. I sure hope it goes my way. And I don't see the Flames making out like bandits on any Kadri or Andersson trade in early November.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

I think they need to be very bad for the org to really think about parting with Kadri. I think the Flames entered this season with expectations they will be on the bubble. Their games before Thanksgiving include matchups with the Blues, Wild, Hawks 2x, Sabres, and Sharks.

They could be .500 at Thanksgiving and after the start they had I think they step back from any move that would be unplanned due to the nightmare start. I could be wrong but following this team it is hard to see them operate differently. If they continue to struggle and lose games it is more likely to force theirs or the players hands to ask for a change

Conroy would have done something with the ample cap space if he thought they were actually going to be a bubble team again. He set the team up to bottom out last year as well, it didn’t happen, and he did it again this season.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I agree that the Flames don't often trade good players with term (more than 1 year) remaining on their deal, including for just futures. But that's not unique to the Flames. That's pretty common. Teams rarely trade off good players, with term remaining, without getting good players back.

The Flames lack top end players. Kadri is arguably their best player (skater). So we shouldn't be surprise there is some apprehension and caution in trading him.

If Kadri and Coleman were 28 years old I would 100% understand the apprehension.

But both were guys signed as UFAs and they are 35 and 33 years old respectively.

There should be absolutely no apprehension or fear when it comes to trading those players with where this team is.

Even if the goal is to contend when the new building is open they shouldn't be part of the plan. Coleman will be 35 and his contract expired. Kadri will be 37 with 2 years left on his deal at that point.

Should be no hesitation to trade them as long as the market is strong for them, and it really sounds like it would be.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Conroy would have done something with the ample cap space if he thought they were actually going to be a bubble team again. He set the team up to bottom out last year as well, it didn’t happen, and he did it again this season.

People don't seem to realize they can bottom out without trading everyone all at once and becoming just a laughing stock team (and then losing the lottery).

The lottery was invented to try and tamp down on stuff like that anyway.

[TheIronMaiden]

I don't understand how Kadri has turned into some kind of a crisis. Andersson yes, you can't let a player with value walk for nothing. but Kadri? are we really that desperate to watch Morton dress every night?

The Flames are the 8th youngest team in the NHL, the've got two 1st picks coming into next year, and one of them looks like its going to be a top 5 selection. They're likely to bring on another couple of good picks for Andersson.

Kadri is small squares. If he stays you get a good player with experience to help young players develop. If you trade him you get a couple of second round picks. Win - Win.

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I agree that the Flames don't often trade good players with term (more than 1 year) remaining on their deal, including for just futures. But that's not unique to the Flames. That's pretty common. Teams rarely trade off good players, with term remaining, without getting good players back.

The Flames lack top end players. Kadri is arguably their best player (skater). So we shouldn't be surprise there is some apprehension and caution in trading him.

He's 35 and they are already last place. What's the apprehension about? Are they going to drop from 32nd to 33rd place?

Kadri is an awesome player and I think a really valuable piece at his experience level and position. This should be about sound asset management for the Flames.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Igottago

He's 35 and they are already last place. What's the apprehension about? Are they going to drop from 32nd to 33rd place?

Kadri is an awesome player and I think a really valuable piece at his experience level and position. This should be about sound asset management for the Flames.

I agree but this isn't fantasy hockey.
All I'm saying is that there can be some appreciation for the factors being weighed by the Flames. Trading your best player for just futures, when that player has term remaining on a good $, is not a decision reached easily.

[Harry Lime]

There are basically no impact UFAs (that are likely to make it to UFA) this year. Certainly no centers. The only viable plan to moving Kadri would have to include a way to get a replacement center who is a clear #1, to take his place when the new arena opens.

The next year features Kucherov and Makar, if you feel that Zary and Honzek are going to find centerman beast mode.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

No GM has this "proclivity". Because the end of contracts are generally when players are easier to move, and when the best value is achieved. There are exceptions but they don't make the rule, and often reflect unhappiness with the player versus some sort of proactive rebuilding process. The Sharks only made one such deal that I can think of (Karlsson). The Flames have done more than that. I can't recall any by Chicago (in fact they acquired Seth Jones). I don't think the Ducks did.

The Hawks traded Jones in the middle of a contract. They traded Hagel with multiple years left for two first round picks. They traded McCabe with multiple years left for a first and second round pick. They traded Debrincat with many tears on control left for multiple picks.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Bonded

Conroy would have done something with the ample cap space if he thought they were actually going to be a bubble team again. He set the team up to bottom out last year as well, it didn’t happen, and he did it again this season.

Ultimately he tried to make the team better but he was not going to do it at all costs. There absolutely were attempts to bolster this lineup in the summer but I agree Conroy is not wavering from what he is willing to spend or who he is willing to go after. Dreger has said more than once if the Canes did not threaten offer sheet on K’Andre Miller then Miller is likely a Calgary Flame

[HighLifeMan]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

The only viable plan to moving Kadri would have to include a way to get a replacement center who is a clear #1, to take his place when the new arena opens.

What? Why?

Kadri isn't a viable option at #1 C moving forward either.

Selling high on a 35 year old asset given the circumstances of being last place in the NHL would be an absolute no brainer for any other organization in the NHL. I am not sure why we choose to be so short sighted in situations like these.

[Ashes]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

This was the tweet

"Since 1990, the Calgary #Flames have made it past game 5 of the 2nd round once.

One time in 35 years.

This is why Flames fans are pissed off with this organization sticking to the status quo when it comes to team building.

It's time to try a different strategy."

Frankly it's a trash tweet.
We are all aware of these things. You can choose to carry that baggage around and into every debate, but I don't see the relevance of most of things that happened 20 years ago, or 25 years ago.

Moreover many believe this organization is doing things differently based on the moves they've made and not made so far. I guess that's up to each person to decide how true that is or not.

But saying this is "status quo" seems to be ignoring a lot and just hyperbolic complaining absent real facts.

He laid out the facts.. that the Flames haven't made it past the second round more than once in 35 years. How is that a "trash tweet"??? I swear some of you guys live in a fantasy world.

I like Conroy too, but as a fan I'm ready for change. I'm ready for a proactive approach to asset management (trading vets before they ask to be traded perhaps). And the FACT that the Flames haven't made it past the second round more than once in 35 years just reinforces that feeling for me (and others I'm sure).

Toxic positivity won't build a contender guys.. trading vets for assets, making good picks in the draft, and developing young players.. that's the way all the other contending teams have done it.

35 years of near futility/mediocrity is impossible to argue against when you look at the numbers (draft pick order/wins/championships/playoff appearences). What are you even arguing against?

It's time for change, pretty sure that was the whole point of the tweet.. it wasn't hyperbolic, it was just facts... seriously I cringe when I see you/dino/pepsi and other's defending this org. from most criticism and shutting down posters who are sick of this 35 year cycle of

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Burning Beard

Or maybe if they get some wins their assets look better after those games and teams aren't circling like sharks in the water hoping for rock bottom prices?

We don't know for sure either way. I sure hope it goes my way. And I don't see the Flames making out like bandits on any Kadri or Andersson trade in early November.

Maybe and you are right we do not know but based on the history of the organization we can assume they are not operating any differently than they had in the past. In 2010 a horrible start after a playoff miss and disastrous season had Iginla front and centre on every rumor. That team took advantage of a soft spot in the schedule and rolled for a while but ran out of steam. The team hung on for another year and a half after that before finally admitting they needed to move on. Maybe they do something different this time but you hear that report from Dreger and I have concerns.

I think history points to pessimism being understood here