2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

He's worried about selling tickets and putting bums on seats at a time when he'll have to shell out $100 million U.S. on player salaries.

Lol yourself.

The Flames will shell out salaries and that will be an OPEX. Are we going to pretend that Edwards is paying players from his personal account?

Are you suggesting the Flames don’t make $100mm in revenues per year? Also do the Flames even pay $100mm per year?

His lol is legit. It’s a joke.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Burning Beard

I hope we get a rare November trade so we can talk about that for a while. You would think a lot of teams out there could use a top 4 dman and surely one of them has a GM willing to overpay...

The problem is the most likely sucker to overpay has no draft capital and no picks. But he does have a pick that goes to one of his biggest rivals if it is not top 5 and that pick is currently projected to be 6th. For that GM I would propose

Morgan Frost (50% retained) and the Flames 2027 6th round pick and Calgary’s 2026 7th for

Toronto’s 2028 1st, Toronto 2027 2nd, Toronto’ 2029 3rd, Calle Jarnkrok

Toronto get’s the local boy with some elite talent and nice connection to the local team. Toronto also gets some strategic draft picks that can help them and their GM loves trading higher picks for lower picks so it fits his MO. Salaries are almost a wash this year.

Flames get a 1st, 2nd and a 3rd for Frost.

Works for both teams.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

The Flames will shell out salaries and that will be an OPEX. Are we going to pretend that Edwards is paying players from his personal account?

Are you suggesting the Flames don’t make $100mm in revenues per year? Also do the Flames even pay $100mm per year?

His lol is legit. It’s a joke.

Edwards is a CEO who views company fortunes personally. So yeah, he watches expenses carefully. So while he doesn't open his own wallet, he does tend to be careful about expenses.

As far as revenues v expenses, the Flames are borderline as far as profits and losses go every year. Long term, it's I suspect they still have not made up losses from COVID. With the arena they are guaranteed to be in the red again. I do know the Oilers make 3 times the revenue of the Flames and I doubt they have three times the expenses.

And even if they are profitable ow, they either are afraid they won't be or want to be more profitable. It's a business, not a charity. So while you can scoff about concern over ticket sales , IMO that's foremost in their mind.

I know for a fact people are cancelling seasons tickets even though they know why a rebuild is necessary. They just don't want to pay $16K a year to watch bad hockey

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Edwards is a CEO who views company fortunes personally. So yeah, he watches expenses carefully. So while he doesn't open his own wallet, he does tend to be careful about expenses.

As far as revenues v expenses, the Flames are borderline as far as profits and losses go every year. Long term, it's I suspect they still have not made up losses from COVID. With the arena they are guaranteed to be in the red again. I do know the Oilers make 3 times the revenue of the Flames and I doubt they have three times the expenses.

And even if they are profitable ow, they either are afraid they won't be or want to be more profitable. It's a business, not a charity. So while you can scoff about concern over ticket sales , IMO that's foremost in their mind.

I know for a fact people are cancelling seasons tickets even though they know why a rebuild is necessary. They just don't want to pay $16K a year to watch bad hockey

And sometimes the answer is in the question.

I wonder what the Oilers did that made them so much more profitable than the Flames.

[WickerChicken]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Edwards is a CEO who views company fortunes personally. So yeah, he watches expenses carefully. So while he doesn't open his own wallet, he does tend to be careful about expenses.

As far as revenues v expenses, the Flames are borderline as far as profits and losses go every year. Long term, it's I suspect they still have not made up losses from COVID. With the arena they are guaranteed to be in the red again. I do know the Oilers make 3 times the revenue of the Flames and I doubt they have three times the expenses.

And even if they are profitable ow, they either are afraid they won't be or want to be more profitable. It's a business, not a charity. So while you can scoff about concern over ticket sales , IMO that's foremost in their mind.

I know for a fact people are cancelling seasons tickets even though they know why a rebuild is necessary. They just don't want to pay $16K a year to watch bad hockey

I’m curious how season-ticket holders would respond if the team played a more entertaining style of hockey. The Flames are boring AF to watch right now, and even in a rebuild, a faster, more exciting brand could change the vibe. Add the hype of a top-three pick and I genuinely wonder how much that would help season-ticket sales. Seem to remember that Chicago's season ticket sales did alright after they drafted Bedard.

Do NHL teams retain any meaningful share of merchandise revenue? I’m trying to understand where Edmonton’s 3× revenue advantage comes from. I assume the gap between us and them isn’t solely driven by tickets and sponsorships.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

I’m not sure how after the Bean blunder the Flames PR don’t have a better handle on who goes on camera for these types of updates.

In a big year, with an awful lot of fan sentiment in favour of a rebuild, this communication was hard to view as anything but abject failure.

A bit of honesty couldn’t possibly be worse than whatever that was.

My meme was a bit tongue in cheek, but I can assure you from what I've heard they're aware of how bad that was and looked.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Nm

[Flame On]

Every GM in the league is a business person/CEO the idea that Calgary has entirely different pressures is laughable. The Flames have what, the oldest arena in the league now. That means a lot of other teams have gone through a cycle of rebuilding and having their team observe different cycles of success.
Let's not pretend the org trying to return to their safety blanket of churning out a mid-tier team, squeaking in, is something that is unreasonable for fans to be concerned about.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

And sometimes the answer is in the question.

I wonder what the Oilers did that made them so much more profitable than the Flames.

They have fanatically dumb fans. The revenue difference isn't about McDavid. And they got McDavid without tanking, BTW.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

They have fanatically dumb fans. The revenue difference isn't about McDavid. And they got McDavid without tanking, BTW.

Oilers would likely have more revenue than the Flames either way, but the reason it's 3x is because they got a star young player and then built a winning roster (even if it was through mismanagement)

And yes the Oilers getting McDavid was luck, but the Oilers also never really shied away from just admitting when a season was lost and leaning into it.

Sure They didn't plan on being bad in the 14-15 season, but when it was obvious they would be they 100% leaned in and traded guys like David Perron (26), Jeff Petry (26) to lean into it even harder and add more picks.

The Oilers traded prime aged players to add extra picks (the Perron pick was the Barzal 1st, Perry 2nd was Jonas siegenthaler, the Oilers turning those extra picks into Griffon Reinhart is a different issue)

Yet the Flames can't even commit to trading 35+ year old players during their unexpectedly bad season.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

And sometimes the answer is in the question.

I wonder what the Oilers did that made them so much more profitable than the Flames.

Won five Stanley Cups in the 1980s and 90s.

The Flames don't have that option.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Oilers would likely have more revenue than the Flames either way, but the reason it's 3x is because they got a star young player and then built a winning roster (even if it was through mismanagement)

And yes the Oilers getting McDavid was luck, but the Oilers also never really shied away from just admitting when a season was lost and leaning into it.

Sure They didn't plan on being bad in the 14-15 season, but when it was obvious they would be they 100% leaned in and traded guys like David Perron (26), Jeff Petry (26) to lean into it even harder and add more picks.

The Oilers traded prime aged players to add extra picks (the Perron pick was the Barzal 1st, Perry 2nd was Jonas siegenthaler) Yet the Flames can't even commit to trading 35+ year old players during their unexpectedly bad season.

Newflash - the revenues were like that before McDavid. Before Taylor Hall and RNH in fact.

This is not an unexpectedly bad season. Last year was unexpectedly good (remember - the year they traded a bunch of older players?).

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

The Oilers traded prime aged players to add extra picks (the Perron pick was the Barzal 1st, Perry 2nd was Jonas siegenthaler) Yet the Flames can't even commit to trading 35+ year old players during their unexpectedly bad season.

I don't recall the Oilers publicly announcing in November that they were going to trade those players. Perron was traded in January, Petry in March. They did not ‘commit to trading’ anything.

I do recall that they traded the Barzal pick away, along with other assets, for Griffin freaking Reinhart.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Newflash - the revenues were like that before McDavid. Before Taylor Hall and RNH in fact.

This is not an unexpectedly bad season. Last year was unexpectedly good (remember - the year they traded a bunch of older players?).

Have any evidence of that?

Oilers got young stars, built a new arena, and then their revenue and organizational worth skyrocketed.

Flames have an opportunity to do the same thing here.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...rs-since-2006/

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...es-since-2006/

Looks pretty close before McDavid to me, according to this from 06/07 to 14/15 the Flames had higher operating revenue in every season...wonder what changed after 2015

So much for that "News Flash"

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Edwards is a CEO who views company fortunes personally. So yeah, he watches expenses carefully. So while he doesn't open his own wallet, he does tend to be careful about expenses.

As far as revenues v expenses, the Flames are borderline as far as profits and losses go every year. Long term, it's I suspect they still have not made up losses from COVID. With the arena they are guaranteed to be in the red again. I do know the Oilers make 3 times the revenue of the Flames and I doubt they have three times the expenses.

And even if they are profitable ow, they either are afraid they won't be or want to be more profitable. It's a business, not a charity. So while you can scoff about concern over ticket sales , IMO that's foremost in their mind.

I know for a fact people are cancelling seasons tickets even though they know why a rebuild is necessary. They just don't want to pay $16K a year to watch bad hockey

Don't forget the Oilers also get to skim from their Foundation so they're making even more money than we think.

The Flames will soon be worth $2 billion. Didn't Murray pay under $20 million for the club in the 80's? While he doesn't want to lose a bunch of money operating the thing, owning a pro sports team is more like owning a rare collectible. You enjoy owning it while also getting incredible appreciation in value. This fact gets conveniently forgotten when owners ask taxpayers to subsidize their business.

I wonder what his succession plan is? More than one pro sports franchise has been ruined once the idiot kid takes over.

[kehatch]

Originally Posted by Flame On

Every GM in the league is a business person/CEO the idea that Calgary has entirely different pressures is laughable. The Flames have what, the oldest arena in the league now. That means a lot of other teams have gone through a cycle of rebuilding and having their team observe different cycles of success.
Let's not pretend the org trying to return to their safety blanket of churning out a mid-tier team, squeaking in, is something that is unreasonable for fans to be concerned about.

No, not every team has the same pressures. Nor is every owner identical.

The Flames struggled with revenue and attendance before the 2004 run. The 2004 run was unexpected and re-established hockey in Calgary under a brand name core. Even in the seasons that followed, where the team couldn't find playoffs success, hockey was healthy in Calgary.

Since then we have lost home grown players like Tkachuk and Gaudreau, were unable to retain Lindholm and Hanafin, and lost drafted players like Erixon and Fox. For the immediate future we have an old arena. We have various other factors working against us in terms of acquiring and keeping top players.

Those things, combined with Calgary's specific ownership, do have an impact on direction.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Edwards is a CEO who views company fortunes personally. So yeah, he watches expenses carefully. So while he doesn't open his own wallet, he does tend to be careful about expenses.

As far as revenues v expenses, the Flames are borderline as far as profits and losses go every year. Long term, it's I suspect they still have not made up losses from COVID. With the arena they are guaranteed to be in the red again. I do know the Oilers make 3 times the revenue of the Flames and I doubt they have three times the expenses.

And even if they are profitable ow, they either are afraid they won't be or want to be more profitable. It's a business, not a charity. So while you can scoff about concern over ticket sales , IMO that's foremost in their mind.

I know for a fact people are cancelling seasons tickets even though they know why a rebuild is necessary. They just don't want to pay $16K a year to watch bad hockey

Yes, the Flames basically operate to break even each year. And that's with a full barn.

They face 3 problems right now:
1) the cap is escalating dramatically (expenses are rising)
2) their revenues are declining (tickets sales are off significantly)
3) the new arena requires a $17M annual payment to the city, on top of expenses

They need revenues to be up substantially when the new arena opens. And with the way ticket sales are going right now, they have reason for concern.

Remember when people said fans would support a rebuild? Well, right now, they aren't. And the rebuild hasn't even started yet!

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Won five Stanley Cups in the 1980s and 90s.

The Flames don't have that option.

This is it really. They birthed generations of fans. It gets passed down. Then McDavid created a bunch of new fans. And Sportsnet. lol

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Don't forget the Oilers also get to skim from their Foundation so they're making even more money than we think.

The Flames will soon be worth $2 billion. Didn't Murray pay under $20 million for the club in the 80's? While he doesn't want to lose a bunch of money operating the thing, owning a pro sports team is more like owning a rare collectible. You enjoy owning it while also getting incredible appreciation in value. This fact gets conveniently forgotten when owners ask taxpayers to subsidize their business.

I wonder what his succession plan is? More than one pro sports franchise has been ruined once the idiot kid takes over.

Flames' value is 19th in the NHL, and Murray Edwards owns a part of that (not all - there are several owners).

Appreciation in value is all well and good but it down't equal cash in your pocket unless you sell. It's yearly profit that equals money in your pocket and the Flames lose money as much as they make it.

I also think you are confusing the original purchase price of the Flames ($16M) in 1980 with what Murray Edwards bought in for back in 1994 (which is a complete unknown).

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by kehatch

No, not every team has the same pressures. Nor is every owner identical.

The Flames struggled with revenue and attendance before the 2004 run. The 2004 run was unexpected and re-established hockey in Calgary under a brand name core. Even in the seasons that followed, where the team couldn't find playoffs success, hockey was healthy in Calgary.

Since then we have lost home grown players like Tkachuk and Gaudreau, were unable to retain Lindholm and Hanafin, and lost drafted players like Erixon and Fox. For the immediate future we have an old arena. We have various other factors working against us in terms of acquiring and keeping top players.

Those things, combined with Calgary's specific ownership, do have an impact on direction.

The economy has changed a lot since then too. In the 04-08 era, Calgary was on top of the world, economically. The team was fun to get behind, with the magical 04 run AND the city was on fire. It was a perfect storm.

Now, the environment isn't such an easy win.

Personally, I have no doubt fans will support the team once they start to improve. And I have no doubt that the new arena will be a huge success for them and the city. But it is far from the no brainer, LMAO that some of you think it is.