2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

I think it's fair to call sample size into account so early this year. Reschny could very well end up better than McQueen in the long run.

...

I doubt a quarter of a season has changed the scouting community's view of him too much.

Originally Posted by Macho0978

I'm sure some have, but I really doubt all have after just 16 games. Especially when McQueen missed the last 5 months of last season. You have to think maybe he is off to a slow star and could get going soon.

Some might start from scratch and disregard all the data prior to this 16 game stretch, just not sure why anyone would do this.

The data prior to this 16 game stretch for McQueen, since he's a year older and it's apparently not fair to judge him on his performance:

18 years old:
Reschny - 16GP 18P (NCAA)
McQueen - 17GP 20P (WHL)

17 years old:
Reschny - 62GP 92P (WHL)
McQueen - 53GP 51P (WHL)

16 years old:
Reschny - 61GP 59P (WHL)
McQueen - 55GP 14P (WHL)

Who is throwing out the data? What's too small a sample size?

[Roof-Daddy]

Yeah McQueen always got a boost in ratings because of his size. I'd take Reschny all day every day.

[ResAlien]

Ok so we've hashed out that we have a better guy already and we don’t want the crappy guy in Anaheim where Rasmus won't go anyway because apparently he hates California, I got that right?

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The data prior to this 16 game stretch for McQueen, since he's a year old and it's apparently not fair to judge him on his performance:

18 years old:
Reschny - 16GP 18P (NCAA)
McQueen - 17GP 20P (WHL)

17 years old:
Reschny - 62GP 92P (WHL)
McQueen - 53GP 51P (WHL)

16 years old:
Reschny - 61GP 59P (WHL)
McQueen - 55GP 14P (WHL)

Who is throwing out the data? What's too small a sample size?

Bob's list is a consolidated ranking of head scouts employed by NHL teams.

Bob - McQueen 7th vs Reschny 25th

Opinions of NHL teams scouts who watch players play and project players potential for a living and spend 100s of hours scouting and have 1 on1 conversations with these kids vs Pepsi who spent 3 minutes looking up stats?

I doubt these scouts have all flipped their opinion on this after 16 games.

Trending down or Reschny trending up sure, but completely disregard ranking that were from mid-June of this year because of 16 games is ridiculous.

There will be midyear rankings coming out soon, will all have McQueen behind Reschny? I guess we can see how that goes.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

Jake Bean was drafted 10+ years ago, McQueen has played 16 games since his draft.

Why do teams pay millions for scouts if they have no clue what they are doing?

Why do you need to make this conversation about absolutes? No room for middle ground....

Yes, they pay lots for scouts, sometimes scouts hit a home run and draft Johnston in the bottom of the 1st round or Wolf in the 7th round. Sometimes they draft a guy who gets labelled a "bust".

I think McQueen still has a lot of value but some people around here are talking about him like he was drafted #1, or top 5.... but as we all know, there is a massive drop in value from 1 to 5 to 10.

Carlsson is untouchable. McTavish is locked up. McQueen is expendable because the other two guys are leading the team to success after 30 games this season. Why is that so hard to acknowledge?

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The data prior to this 16 game stretch for McQueen, since he's a year older and it's apparently not fair to judge him on his performance:

18 years old:
Reschny - 16GP 18P (NCAA)
McQueen - 17GP 20P (WHL)

17 years old:
Reschny - 62GP 92P (WHL)
McQueen - 53GP 51P (WHL)

16 years old:
Reschny - 61GP 59P (WHL)
McQueen - 55GP 14P (WHL)

Who is throwing out the data? What's too small a sample size?

Those stats were already taken into account for their respective draft rankings. Obviously, the tools and size with McQueen, his ranking reflected this and also how that projects into his NHL development. If it were as simple as looking at PPG then McQueen would have been ranked lower to begin with.

[YyjFlames]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

McQueen's rank stopped being relevant when he was drafted and where he was drafted stopped being relevant as soon as the draft was over. You think anyone cares today?

2021
9OA Tyler Boucher
23OA Wyatt Johnson

2020
7OA Alexander Holtz
18OA Dawson Mercer

2019
5OA Alex Turcotte
15OA Cole Caulfield

2018
9OA Vitali Kravstov
23OA K'Andre Miller

2017
7OA Lias Andersson
20OA Robert Thomas

2016
5OA Olli Joulevi
26OA Tage Thompson

etc etc.

"But the draft rankings!"

Look at the actual players and their actual production at the same age and make an argument for McQueen. I'm genuinely interested to hear your reasoning beyond "but he was drafted higher."

Draft rankings absolutely still matter five months after a draft. It's why redrafts are silly to do for at least 4-5 years, which conveniently is when you've started your comparisons.

McQueen wasn't drafted in the top 10 because of how many points he was putting up in Junior. He was drafted for his long term projection, size and skills. On your last comment about "actual production" at the same age, Reschny outproduced McQueen on a point per game basis in the previous two years before the draft and yet the consensus had him lower than McQueen at the draft. Why? Because scouting is more than production and involves a lot of projecting.

In saying that, I agree with you that Reschny is ahead of McQueen right now, but that's more of a personal perspective as I had them pretty even at the draft as well, with Reschny a less risky pick and McQueen a homerun swing.

[TOfan]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Speaking of mental gymnastics.... your arguments always rely on running in the other direction and speaking in generic terms without specifics. Does invoking Dobson or the Oilers mean you disagree that the Ducks need a #1RD? Dunking on the Ducks fans is fun and all but they clearly know the details of their team better than you do.

Andersson has been the top RD on the trade board for about a year and is the top RD on the board for next summer's UFA class. That isn't a thin argument, that is just stating some information that is widely accepted as true. If you want to disprove it then you need to put in more effort than this runaround.

It's also weird that you cannot just be happy that Andersson's value is up and changes the leverage that Conroy has in negotiations. Why does this thread always need to have a competition for who can be the most wettest blanket?

Well, look, i hope you’re right. I’d be happy with an Andersson-McQueen deal. Who knows. Maybe Andersson is the guy for the Ducks and he does seem like a Verbeek style player. They have been rumoured to be sniffing around some impact players for a while now. Maybe they are willing to sacrifice a significant future asset to do it.

What would not surprise me is the Ducks offering a first round pick before they offer McQueen. I don’t see McQueen being on the table unless there’s a bidding war and an extension in place.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by YyjFlames

Draft rankings absolutely still matter five months after a draft. It's why redrafts are silly to do for at least 4-5 years, which conveniently is when you've started your comparisons.

McQueen wasn't drafted in the top 10 because of how many points he was putting up in Junior. He was drafted for his long term projection, size and skills. On your last comment about "actual production" at the same age, Reschny outproduced McQueen on a point per game basis in the previous two years before the draft and yet the consensus had him lower than McQueen at the draft. Why? Because scouting is more than production and involves a lot of projecting.

In saying that, I agree with you that Reschny is ahead of McQueen right now, but that's more of a personal perspective as I had them pretty even at the draft as well, with Reschny a less risky pick and McQueen a homerun swing.

Ryan Getzlaf had a pretty bad D+1 year. 54 points in 51 games.

Hugh Jessiman (12th OA from NYR in that same draft) had a PPG in NCAA that season with Dartmouth.

Not saying Getzlaf is McQueen, but he's a good comp on the tools side of things and absolutely proves the rankings hold merit for longer than a few months after the draft.

[Poe969]

I keep waiting for a trade to happen, all I ask is that when it does happen, the title of the thread be " (trade player's name)GONZO!"

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by YyjFlames

Draft rankings absolutely still matter five months after a draft. It's why redrafts are silly to do for at least 4-5 years, which conveniently is when you've started your comparisons.

McQueen wasn't drafted in the top 10 because of how many points he was putting up in Junior. He was drafted for his long term projection, size and skills. On your last comment about "actual production" at the same age, Reschny outproduced McQueen on a point per game basis in the previous two years before the draft and yet the consensus had him lower than McQueen at the draft. Why? Because scouting is more than production and involves a lot of projecting.

In saying that, I agree with you that Reschny is ahead of McQueen right now, but that's more of a personal perspective as I had them pretty even at the draft as well, with Reschny a less risky pick and McQueen a homerun swing.

You're scratching the point I'm making here. I think there's a lot of overlap between what we're both getting at.

If redrafts are silly to do in the first 4-5 years after a draft... how meaningful are those rankings to begin with?

It's speculative. It IS projection. It's taking a guess at future performance based on a whole bunch of factors. And those guesses are so regularly wrong (sometimes by one or two draft positions, sometimes by dozens or hundreds) that "well he was ranked here and the other guy was ranked there!" is just so silly of an appeal to authority. Who cares where guys were ranked? The draft is OVER boys.

Like, I get that it's compelling for guys like Macho who just need someone to tell them what to think, but if scouts are going to be wrong anyway, we might as well have fun thinking about it and risk being totally wrong ourselves lol.

Lord knows I'm wrong on prospects and everything else hockey related all the time. But who cares? That's just as fun as being right.

If someone thinks McQueen is better than Reschny and wants to disagree, put some meat at that bone and tell me why. "Well he was ranked higher" is just boring.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

Ryan Getzlaf had a pretty bad D+1 year. 54 points in 51 games.

Hugh Jessiman (12th OA from NYR in that same draft) had a PPG in NCAA that season with Dartmouth.

I'd wager the Ducks are happy they didn't re-rank these prospects in that timeframe.

They probably shouldnt have been ranked where they were to begin with! lol

Jessiman: 12OA
Getzlaf: 19OA

Imagine that. The rankings were wrong.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by TOfan

Well, look, i hope you’re right. I’d be happy with an Andersson-McQueen deal. Who knows. Maybe Andersson is the guy for the Ducks and he does seem like a Verbeek style player. They have been rumoured to be sniffing around some impact players for a while now. Maybe they are willing to sacrifice a significant future asset to do it.

What would not surprise me is the Ducks offering a first round pick before they offer McQueen. I don’t see McQueen being on the table unless there’s a bidding war and an extension in place.

Agreed. An extension would be key and the Ducks are one of the teams with cap space to offer him what he wants. The bidding war also is needed to drive up the value and I think that is realistic as there have been so many teams linked to Andersson.

It also helps that there are not a lot of other RD on the market. Faulk is not really in a position to draw attention away from Andersson. He is really more of a consolation prize for one of the teams that cannot get Andersson.

I also consider the rumour from the summer that Conroy doesn't want a package for Andersson. If Conroy can try to find a single player that is the equivalent of "Bischel + 1st" then I think McQueen isn't far off on that value. Maybe Conroy needs to add a 3rd to close the gap?

But I do not buy the idea that McQueen's value is the same as if he were drafted in the top 5, because he wasn't.

[PepsiFree]

Here's another fun one:

Cody Glass, C, 6'3" - 6OA, 2017
D-1 65GP 27P
D-0 69GP 94P
NHL 271GP 80P

Nick Suzuki, C, 5'11" - 13OA, 2017
D-1 63GP 38P
D-0 65GP 96P
NHL 484GP 408P

Same scouting staff, too.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You're scratching the point I'm making here. I think there's a lot of overlap between what we're both getting at.

If redrafts are silly to do in the first 4-5 years after a draft... how meaningful are those rankings to begin with?

It's speculative. It IS projection. It's taking a guess at future performance based on a whole bunch of factors. And those guesses are so regularly wrong (sometimes by one or two draft positions, sometimes by dozens or hundreds) that "well he was ranked here and the other guy was ranked there!" is just so silly of an appeal to authority. Who cares where guys were ranked? The draft is OVER boys.

Like, I get that it's compelling for guys like Macho who just need someone to tell them what to think, but if scouts are going to be wrong anyway, we might as well have fun thinking about it and risk being totally wrong ourselves lol.

Lord knows I'm wrong on prospects and everything else hockey related all the time. But who cares? That's just as fun as being right.

If someone thinks McQueen is better than Reschny and wants to disagree, put some meat at that bone and tell me why. "Well he was ranked higher" is just boring.

Scouts will be wrong and Reschny might be better, but I really doubt that scouts will all have Reschny ahead of McQueen right now.

I get it that at some point it does not matter where a player is drafted. But if I'm making decisions, I'm trusting people that have spent hours and hours watching a player over myself who has not. I'm sure Conroy would ask Button on this topic

I could use stats to form an opinion, but I like to do a deep dive into all stats. I like to use sites like NHL Edge, Natural Stat Trick, Puck IQ. I use these stats to argue my opinion on players I have spent hours and hours watching at the NHL level. I still use them even though I have seen these players play many times.

Scouts have data we do not have. What site do you use from WAR, xGF%, quality of comp or quality of teammate for NCAA and CHL players? I struggle to find any data like that, and I can't just rip down to the Providence to watch McQueen play. His games are televised. Do I have time to watch him. How do you form such a strong opinion on who is better without watching these guys play and in the absence of a ton of data not available for players in these leagues. Seems very ignorant to ignore the professionals in this situation who have tons of data that we just don't have.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

Bob's list is a consolidated ranking of head scouts employed by NHL teams.

Bob - McQueen 7th vs Reschny 25th

Opinions of NHL teams scouts who watch players play and project players potential for a living and spend 100s of hours scouting and have 1 on1 conversations with these kids vs Pepsi who spent 3 minutes looking up stats?

I doubt these scouts have all flipped their opinion on this after 16 games.

Trending down or Reschny trending up sure, but completely disregard ranking that were from mid-June of this year because of 16 games is ridiculous.

There will be midyear rankings coming out soon, will all have McQueen behind Reschny? I guess we can see how that goes.

same scounts that thought Wolf and Gaudreau couldn't play in the NHL

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

They probably shouldnt have been ranked where they were to begin with! lol

Jessiman: 12OA
Getzlaf: 19OA

Imagine that. The rankings were wrong.

Lol. That's funny. Terrible example by me on draft spot...had Getz as a top 10 pick for some reason.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Agreed. An extension would be key and the Ducks are one of the teams with cap space to offer him what he wants. The bidding war also is needed to drive up the value and I think that is realistic as there have been so many teams linked to Andersson.

It also helps that there are not a lot of other RD on the market. Faulk is not really in a position to draw attention away from Andersson. He is really more of a consolation prize for one of the teams that cannot get Andersson.

I also consider the rumour from the summer that Conroy doesn't want a package for Andersson. If Conroy can try to find a single player that is the equivalent of "Bischel + 1st" then I think McQueen isn't far off on that value. Maybe Conroy needs to add a 3rd to close the gap?

But I do not buy the idea that McQueen's value is the same as if he were drafted in the top 5, because he wasn't.

I just don't think it's realistic. How often, within 12 months of being drafted, have top 10 or top 15 picks been traded?

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

Lol. That's funny. Terrible example by me on draft spot...had Getz as a top 10 pick for some reason.

Getz was ranked pre-draft in the top 10 and slipped draft day though.

[YyjFlames]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I just don't think it's realistic. How often, within 12 months of being drafted, have top 10 or top 15 picks been traded?

Totally. There's perceived value by us and by other NHL teams and there's real value to the team that holds the player. McQueen may only be worth Bischel plus a 1st to some of us and a lot of NHL teams. But I doubt Anaheim sees it that way, and they may actually consider him having the same value as a top 5 pick.

I suspect they were pretty happy he was available at 10, and they would have also drafted him knowing he was going to be a longer term project pick who needed to grow into his frame (like Calgary drafting Honzek). They have time and can wait until he develops because of their young centre depth, so his value to them is likely higher than to a team who may want a centre to step in and play next year.