2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Royle9

1.5 trades realistically left imo.
No updates since last night, I think it’s all going to come down to retention and the willingness of Mr.Edwards and management.

Well, if Kadri is going to be very disappointed to still be in CGY after today, he can help himself alleviate the disappointment and waive his NTC.

[sureLoss]

https://twitter.com/user/status/2029918484801442218

[Nelson]

I cannot recall seeing rumours of a team being willing to acquire Kadri without retention. And Colorado is thought to have agreed to acquire Kadri for at least the assets they gave to Toronto for Roy, and the owners said no to that trade because of retention. So, I don’t think a Kadri trade is possible unless a team becomes willing to acquire without retention. I find that unlikely. So, I don’t think we’re seeing a Kadri trade.

[Sec214]

Originally Posted by Royle9

1.5 trades realistically left imo.
No updates since last night, I think it’s all going to come down to retention and the willingness of Mr.Edwards and management.

This is a funny statement.

Funny when it came from Kipr.

Funny when something similar came from Dregs.

The outside noise trying to pressure the flames to retaining millions without paying the price. Hilarious.

[CFO]

If a trade happens with Avs - I wonder if Flames target a guy like Zellers.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Nelson

I cannot recall seeing rumours of a team being willing to acquire Kadri without retention. And Colorado is thought to have agreed to acquire Kadri for at least the assets they gave to Toronto for Roy, and the owners said no to that trade because of retention. So, I don’t think a Kadri trade is possible unless a team becomes willing to acquire without retention. I find that unlikely. So, I don’t think we’re seeing a Kadri trade.

I am guessing the amount of the retention was the issue, as opposed to retention itself.

With Kadri requiring 3+ years of retention, even a small amount starts being quite a bit.

[scobel]

Originally Posted by Royle9

1.5 trades realistically left imo.
No updates since last night, I think it’s all going to come down to retention and the willingness of Mr.Edwards and management.

I’m a bit surprised Calgary couldn’t find a team willing to take the full contract for Nazem Kadri, even if the return was just a 5th-round pick. If Kadri isn’t moved without retention, I’d be pretty surprised if the Flames don’t end up retaining salary on either Blake Coleman or another player to get something done.

I don’t think the issue is whether they’re willing to retain — it’s just that retaining on Kadri would mean a lot of money tied up for a long time, so the return would need to justify it, saying the obvious I think.

I’d think Joel Hanley should be able to find a new home somewhere. As for Brayden Pachal, I like him, but I do wonder how the rest of the league views him — maybe more as a waiver-type pickup. Same idea with Ryan Lomberg

[Roko]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

https://twitter.com/user/status/2029918484801442218

Feels like both us and NYR know teams haven’t offered enough.
Whoever bends first sets the price.

[sureLoss]

https://twitter.com/user/status/2029921573314986149

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Sec214

This is a funny statement.

Funny when it came from Kipr.

Funny when something similar came from Dregs.

The outside noise trying to pressure the flames to retaining millions without paying the price. Hilarious.

Thing is it's a complex scenario, is it paying the price or is the cost of facilitating a trade for the Flames?

The Flames promised Kadri $21M over the next 3 years of the deal, it's questionable if he's worth that money at this point especially for at the very least the last 1-2 years of that deal.

Flames are the team that benefited from the reduced salary cap hit for the first 4 years of the deal by giving an aging player a 7 year deal.

I'm not sure it's fair to expect a team to eat the full $7M - because with long term contracts for aging players the assumption is always the last half of the deal is not as valuable as the front half of the deal.

If a team was asking to retain 50% then I'd agree you need to pay up.

But if it's $1.5M-$2M then IMO that's the cost of doing business for the Flames. It's not about saving the other teams cap. It's about you getting rid of a $7M liability for Kadri's 37 and 38 year old seasons and you have to pay a bit of that.

I almost look at it as if the flames retain $6M it's like they are eating $3M of those last two seasons, which is actually fair and I'm not sure is actually an unfair ask by the trading teams.

I see people comparing it to the value of Marleau or Monahan and it's not the same scenario. You're not shedding a complete contract and paying a team to take on an anchor. You're getting out of your own liability.

Flames got most of the benefit from the 7 year deal and now are asking the teams to take on all the risk of those last two seasons.

As long as a 1st and a A/B prospect are coming back then it shouldn't be an issue.

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I am guessing the amount of the retention was the issue, as opposed to retention itself.

With Kadri requiring 3+ years of retention, even a small amount starts being quite a bit.

I agree. I’m guessing the Avs wanted at least 2M, but I wouldn’t be surprised by the full 50%.

[FlamesAreOne]

Really, really hope we can make another move today.

[Roko]

Kadri buyout isn’t bad at all if things go south fast

[Nelson]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Thing is it's a complex scenario, is it paying the price or is the cost of facilitating a trade for the Flames?

The Flames promised Kadri $21M over the next 3 years of the deal, it's questionable if he's worth that money at this point especially for at the very least the last 1-2 years of that deal.

Flames are the team that benefited from the reduced salary cap for the first 4 years of the deal.

I'm not sure it's fair to expect a team to eat the full $7M - because with long term contracts for aging players the assumption is always the last half of the deal is not as valuable as the back half of the deal.

If a team was asking to retain 50% then I'd agree you need to pay up.

But if it's $1.5M-$2M then IMO that's the cost of doing business for the Flames. It's not about saving the other teams cap. It's about you getting rid of a $7M liability for Kadri's 37 and 38 year old seasons and you have to pay a bit of that.

I almost look at it as if the flames retain $6M it's like they are eating $3M of those last two seasons, which is actually fair and I'm not sure is actually an unfair ask by the trading teams.

Flames got most of the benefit from the 7 year deal and now are asking the teams to take on all the risk of those last two seasons.

I think salary retention is just the realistic cost of doing business given all the circumstances.

[joejoe3]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

https://twitter.com/user/status/2029921573314986149

lol watch skinner goes to FLA

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by scobel

I’m a bit surprised Calgary couldn’t find a team willing to take the full contract for Nazem Kadri, even if the return was just a 5th-round pick. If Kadri isn’t moved without retention, I’d be pretty surprised if the Flames don’t end up retaining salary on either Blake Coleman or another player to get something done.

I don’t think the issue is whether they’re willing to retain — it’s just that retaining on Kadri would mean a lot of money tied up for a long time, so the return would need to justify it, saying the obvious I think.

I’d think Joel Hanley should be able to find a new home somewhere. As for Brayden Pachal, I like him, but I do wonder how the rest of the league views him — maybe more as a waiver-type pickup. Same idea with Ryan Lomberg

Calgary isn’t trading Kadri for a 5th. They may as well keep him for that price.

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by Sec214

This is a funny statement.

Funny when it came from Kipr.

Funny when something similar came from Dregs.

The outside noise trying to pressure the flames to retaining millions without paying the price. Hilarious.

I'm not saying its pressure.
I'm saying that the only way teams are making offers right now for Kadri are structured on flames retaining salary.

If the offers are not worth retaining on, then it would be foolish to make the trade just to make the trade and pay a bunch of money (7M+) just to say you made a trade.

The reality is that every offer on Kadri thus far has come with a retention requirement, that's just the fact of the matter.

[Burning Beard]

So if the Flames want compensation for eating millions of dollars that's not fair to the acquiring team? Just because fans on a message board want a trade? Not sure I understand the argument.

Does anyone have examples of teams eating millions of dollars of salary for no compensation? Kadri doesn't have to be traded despite what is posted on here every day. I would prefer he is, but it's not the end of the world and won't destroy the rebuild of he's dealt over the summer IMO

I also think this has been a bunch of posturing and he's out the door today with the Flames retaining hahah so who knows.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

https://twitter.com/user/status/2029918484801442218

Keep him!
Finish ahead of us in the tankathon. Top 2 pick for the Flames this year + all the other draft capital.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Royle9

I'm not saying its pressure.
I'm saying that the only way teams are making offers right now for Kadri are structured on flames retaining salary.

If the offers are not worth retaining on, then it would be foolish to make the track just to make the trade and pay a bunch of money (7M+) just to say you made a trade.

The reality is that every offer on Kadri thus far has come with a retention requirement, that's just the fact of the matter.

And it should be expected if you're the Flames.

They reaped the benefits of the first 4 years of a long term contract for Kadri, where I think every single poster on this board at the time of the signing would have said "It's fair now but the last 2-3 years of that deal might not age well".

Kadri has bad season next year and it becomes an untradable contract.

It's not crazy that teams are not thrilled to be taking on $7M for his 36, 37, and 38 year old seasons. Especially the last two years of that deal are very risky.

To me $1.5M retention to bring Kadri down to $5.5M for the 3 seasons is probably just the cost of business for the Flames.

Because they reality is they saved that $4.5M on the front half of the contract when he was worth more than $7M and now it's just equalizing that equation.

Originally Posted by Burning Beard

So if the Flames want compensation for eating millions of dollars that's not fair to the acquiring team? Just because fans on a message board want a trade? Not sure I understand the argument.

Does anyone have examples of teams eating millions of dollars of salary for no compensation? Kadri doesn't have to be traded despite what is posted on here every day. I would prefer he is, but it's not the end of the world and won't destroy the rebuild of he's dealt over the summer IMO

I also think this has been a bunch of posturing and he's out the door today with the Flames retaining hahah so who knows.

Flames are the one that gave him the contract that was always going to be a liability in the back half though.

It's not the Flames eating money as a third party. It's the Flames eating money on the contract they signed that at this point is an overpayment for the 36-38 year old seasons of Kadri.

Nobody is giving a 36 year old Kadri a 3 x $7M contract this offseason if it means they have to pay a 1st and a top prospect for that right.

Retention is just a requirement to get the best trade return for what Kadri is bringing for those 3 seasons becasue it's unlikely a team is going to pay a premium for a 36 year old with that contract.