2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[YyjFlames]

Originally Posted by Ryan Coke

Exactly. Team A may prefer to wait until after the olympics, but if you find the gadget you want on FB marketplace, but then say “I’m going on vacation for 2 weeks, but I’ll buy it when I get back”, then your taking a big risk that someone else will get it before you.

If Stevie Y decides to wait, that’s a huge risk he’s taking. If Conroy gets a good deal in the meantime then the Wings would miss out. Every risk comes with a counter risk.

Also, if he is traded as a rental only, that’s fine. Honestly I would plan for that, as most potential UFA deals are purely rentals, and many of the prices paid are still very good. But if a team is willing to pay a further premium to get an extension done, also great.

Maybe it’s a matter of the 1st round pick and Danielson if he’ll extend, but the prospect gets downgraded if he doesn’t want to extend yet.

Either way we should get a good deal.

One of the weaknesses in Conroy’s trading strategy is he seems to wait to get a deal he likes and when he likes it, he circles back to the other interested teams to see if they’ll beat it. Teams know that, so maybe they’re waiting on that circle back before making a strong offer as they know they’ll have a shot before conroy makes the deal.

[Freeway]

If they were great offers they would have traded him.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by All In Good Time

Of course if it’s somewhere you really want to be you sign
If they have the assets to acquire you
Otherwise, you’ve earned the right to be a free agent.
Not disagreeing necessarily but it just makes sense to me

Also
The 8th year might not be as huge as it used to be with the cap going up so quickly

You would think anyone willing to give him an 8th year is in return for a lower AAV. So yeah hard to say what the 8th year is worth.

You might offer him 7x$9.5 or 8x$9.

Or maybe NHL GM's start doing business differently and don't hand out max term contracts to players quite so automatically.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by YyjFlames

One of the weaknesses in Conroy’s trading strategy is he seems to wait to get a deal he likes and when he likes it, he circles back to the other interested teams to see if they’ll beat it. Teams know that, so maybe they’re waiting on that circle back before making a strong offer as they know they’ll have a shot before conroy makes the deal.

How is that a weakness? If nobody makes Conroy an offer he likes, he doesn't make a deal. If you don't make a strong offer, you don't get the player.

What you're suggesting is about as sensible as six fat guys sitting around a pizza, and nobody is touching it because they want someone else to be the first to admit he's hungry.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Except you have no idea what the offers were at the draft

I hate this argument, why do we discuss anything then?

None of us know what the offers are ever, doesn't mean we can't discuss it.

It's pretty obvious that had they put Andersson on the market at that draft with 2 years of retention that their would have been an immense market for him.

RH dmen are always highly valued.

Originally Posted by Freeway

If they were great offers they would have traded him.

I don't think they even started shopping him until the 2025 Draft, and by that point he was coming off a poor season, had a NTC, and also had limitations in terms of where he's willing to sign an extension.

2024 draft would have been peak trade value IMO.

My guess is he would have returned a package similar to what Sergachev returned at that time - and that was Geekie (2022 11th OV pick), JJ Moser (has turned into a great top 4, and probably top pair dman) and a 2025 2nd.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

The frustrating part to me would be Conroy making the same mistake twice. The Flames were in control of the situation but they let it get to this point.

Andersson should have been traded at the 2024 draft, and this isn't just hindsight, I was banging the table for him to be moved at that draft then too.

You had just went through the Hanifin ordeal and got railroaded by a pending UFA with trade protection refusing to re-sign with anybody but a limited number of teams.

You had Andersson who as of the 2024 Draft didn't have a NTC yet (his NTC kicked in on July 1) and the discussion of a extension wouldn't have even been a thought in anybody's mind.

Had they shopped Andersson then they would have gotten a haul, and likely an even bigger haul had they been willing to retain 50% at that point.

2 years of Andersson at $2.275M would have returned a ransom, especially since hypothetically all 32 teams could have been involved.

So while it's not the end of the world, and they probably still end up with a late first for Andersson even just as a rental, had they been more proactive they would have ended up with so much more.

If they can actually get a good deal with an extension then it's moot anyways, but if not then it will be a missed opportunity and a repeat of a similar error.

I would argue Andersson's 49, 39, to 31 pts was a trend most teams wouldn't give a tonne for, him bouncing back this season is probably why we're talking a 1st and a top prospect.

[SuperMatt18]

I think you guys are all missing that I said 2024 draft.

He didn't have his 31 point season yet, he didn't have a NTC yet (that would have kicked in July 1 2024), and he would have had 2 full years remaining on a contract that was already great value at $4.55M and would have probably been the best value contract in the league if you retained for 2 years and shopped him around at $2.275M.

Yes him having a career season to date so far this season has helped salvage the situation a lot, but in the end that will only come to fruition if he actually agrees to re-sign with a team willing to pay the bigger value.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

It's pretty obvious that had they put Andersson on the market at that draft with 2 years of retention that their would have been an immense market for him.

As opposed to now, when there is an immense market for him without retention? I know which is better for the organization.

RH dmen are always highly valued.

Bad ones aren't.

As Snuffleupagus points out, Andersson was not looking like a good acquisition at that time.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I think you guys are all missing that I said 2024 draft.

He didn't have his 31 point season yet, he didn't have a NTC yet (that would have kicked in July 1 2024), and he would have had 2 full years remaining on a contract that was already great value at $4.55M and would have probably been the best value contract in the league if you retained for 2 years and shopped him around at $2.275M.

Yes him having a career season to date so far this season has helped salvage the situation a lot, but in the end that will only come to fruition if he actually agrees to re-sign with a team willing to pay the bigger value.

I still think they thought they’d get more for him at the deadline last year rather than in the offseason and then they ended up in the playoff race.

[YyjFlames]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

How is that a weakness? If nobody makes Conroy an offer he likes, he doesn't make a deal. If you don't make a strong offer, you don't get the player.

What you're suggesting is about as sensible as six fat guys sitting around a pizza, and nobody is touching it because they want someone else to be the first to admit he's hungry.

It puts less pressure on a team to make their strongest offer to get that player. They know he’s going to come back to them for an offer to beat. Any trade pattern is a weakness.

It’s kind of similar to why Burke wouldn’t trade Cammalleri as he wasn’t happy with the offers and didn’t want to set a bad precedent that the flames would accept lowball offers on players.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

As opposed to now, when there is an immense market for him without retention? I know which is better for the organization.



Bad ones aren't.

As Snuffleupagus points out, Andersson was not looking like a good acquisition at that time.

Sigh...he hadn't had a bad season yet at the 2024 draft. That would have been the 2025 draft, and I'm not surprised they weren't able to get full value for him then.

At the 2024 draft he was coming off 50, 49, and 39 point seasons. And with 2 years at $4.55M he would have been good value without retention, and would have been immaculate value with retention, especially with no NTC.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Sigh...he hadn't had a bad season yet at the 2024 draft. That would have been the 2025 draft, and I'm not surprised they weren't able to get full value for him then.

At the 2024 draft he was coming off 50, 49, and 39 point seasons.

In other words, two years of a downward trend, growing steeper as it went.

And with 2 years at $4.55M he would have been good value without retention, and would have been immaculate value with retention.

In your opinion. Which I and others, including the Flames' management, disagree with. You're not making it more convincing with the arguments you've presented so far.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I hate this argument, why do we discuss anything then?

None of us know what the offers are ever, doesn't mean we can't discuss it.

It's pretty obvious that had they put Andersson on the market at that draft with 2 years of retention that their would have been an immense market for him.

RH dmen are always highly valued.



I don't think they even started shopping him until the 2025 Draft, and by that point he was coming off a poor season, had a NTC, and also had limitations in terms of where he's willing to sign an extension.

2024 draft would have been peak trade value IMO.

My guess is he would have returned a package similar to what Sergachev returned at that time - and that was Geekie (2022 11th OV pick), JJ Moser (has turned into a great top 4, and probably top pair dman) and a 2025 2nd.

We can discuss it but you are already assigning blame and faulting him, instead of considering the more logical assumption that the prices being offered simply weren't there. Or perhaps he wasn't trying to sell him at all. I don't know. But when you say things like the below it sure seems like you are quite sure of what you know and don't know.

"Conroy making the same mistake twice."

"Had they shopped Andersson then they would have gotten a haul, and likely an even bigger haul had they been willing to retain 50% at that point.

2 years of Andersson at $2.275M would have returned a ransom, especially since hypothetically all 32 teams could have been involved."

" had they been more proactive they would have ended up with so much more."

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

I think you guys are all missing that I said 2024 draft.

He didn't have his 31 point season yet, he didn't have a NTC yet (that would have kicked in July 1 2024), and he would have had 2 full years remaining on a contract that was already great value at $4.55M and would have probably been the best value contract in the league if you retained for 2 years and shopped him around at $2.275M.

Yes him having a career season to date so far this season has helped salvage the situation a lot, but in the end that will only come to fruition if he actually agrees to re-sign with a team willing to pay the bigger value.

Yes I did think you meant the 2025 draft. And I would agree that it is quite likely that at the 2024 draft they weren't ready to move on from him, including because they perhaps still though maybe they'll re-sign him. It's fair to say that being that proactive is not how this organization operates and perhaps that's a fair criticism. I still think though it's a little over-stated to say Conroy is making the same mistakes again.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

In other words, two years of a downward trend, growing steeper as it went.



In your opinion. Which I and others, including the Flames' management, disagree with. You're not making it more convincing with the arguments you've presented so far.

Lol that whole one point is such a downward trend, especially considering the turmoil the team was in.

It's just common logic.

A 27 year old, top pairing, RH d-man, with no trade protection to limit his destinations, and with a value contract already at $4.55M, and with the possibility of retention.

Is going to carry more value than a 29 year old, top pairing RH d-man, that now has trade protection, and only has about 35 games left on his current contract.

Flames management probably doesn't disagree that they wouldn't have gotten more value for Andersson at the 2024 draft, Flames management just wasn't ready to trade him then.

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

We can discuss it but you are already assigning blame and faulting him, instead of considering the more logical assumption that the prices being offered simply weren't there. Or perhaps he wasn't trying to sell him at all. I don't know. But when you say things like the below it sure seems like you are quite sure of what you know and don't know.

"Conroy making the same mistake twice."

"Had they shopped Andersson then they would have gotten a haul, and likely an even bigger haul had they been willing to retain 50% at that point.

2 years of Andersson at $2.275M would have returned a ransom, especially since hypothetically all 32 teams could have been involved."

" had they been more proactive they would have ended up with so much more."

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

Yes I did think you meant the 2025 draft. And I would agree that it is quite likely that at the 2024 draft they weren't ready to move on from him, including because they perhaps still though maybe they'll re-sign him. It's fair to say that being that proactive is not how this organization operates and perhaps that's a fair criticism. I still think though it's a little over-stated to say Conroy is making the same mistakes again.

It's 100% because they weren't ready to move him. I remember there was some discussion around the draft at that time "Flames aren't looking to move Andersson".

And IMO that's what the mistake was. And IMO it is Conroy making the same mistake again. Don't wait until a player is a pending UFA, that also has trade protection, to move him.

With Hanifin it wasn't really a mistake because he didn't really have a choice, he inherited that situation. But that situation should have given him a reason to be more proactive with Andersson.

And the reason people were saying to trade him then was because the Flames wouldn't be in a position to re-sign a 30 year old to an 8 year contract now, which lo and behold is the exact reason they aren't open to re-signing him now.

Going back to the 2023 Season the Flames should have been willing to move ANY player, nobody should have been untouchable except for Wolf but he wasn't on the roster yet.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Lol that whole one point is such a downward trend, especially considering the turmoil the team was in.

It's just common logic.

Really? You haven't presented anything but your opinions so far. There's no logic involved in that.

A 27 year old, top pairing, RH d-man, with no trade protection to limit his destinations, and with a value contract already at $4.55M, and with the possibility.

Is going to carry more value than a 29 year old, top pairing RH d-man, that now has trade protection, and only has about 35 games left on his current contract.

Very often, GMs DO NOT WANT to acquire players with term remaining. Fans have the idea that term = an asset. Actually it's a liability. GMs of contending teams don't want to acquire players with term because they are going to need all the cap room they've got to re-sign their existing players before that term is up. I've often heard commentators – ones who had been in NHL management themselves – talk about how they would rather acquire players on expiring contracts.

And IMO that's what the mistake was.

Going back to the 2023 Season the Flames should have been willing to move ANY player, nobody should have been untouchable except for Wolf but he wasn't on the roster yet.

I see. So you're one of those people who think you can have an entire roster full of rookies and minor-leaguers, the hell with the salary floor, and they will just sort themselves out and figure out how to win at the NHL level without anyone leading by example.

I think this conversation is done.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Really? You haven't presented anything but your opinions so far. There's no logic involved in that.



Very often, GMs DO NOT WANT to acquire players with term remaining. Fans have the idea that term = an asset. Actually it's a liability. GMs of contending teams don't want to acquire players with term because they are going to need all the cap room they've got to re-sign their existing players before that term is up. I've often heard commentators – ones who had been in NHL management themselves – talk about how they would rather acquire players on expiring contracts.

GMs don't want to acquire big money contracts that don't to fit into their cap structure and might hamper the team.

Acquiring Rasmus Andersson for $4.55M is not that scenario. It doesn't prevent you from re-signing your own players, it provides you value in that position that helps your cap allocation doesn't hurt it.

And if the Flames were willing to retain then him at $2.275M would have been giving the team the luxury of paying third pairing money to a top pairing d-man, every team would have been interested in that.

I see. So you're one of those people who think you can have an entire roster full of rookies and minor-leaguers, the hell with the salary floor, and they will just sort themselves out and figure out how to win at the NHL level without anyone leading by example.

I think this conversation is done.

Being open to trading any player is not the same as trading every player. Everything should be a constant evaluation when you are rebuilding, and nobody should be off limits.

The answer when a team calls you with interest in a player should never be "we aren't interested in moving that player", it should be "What are you willing to pay"

And then you make that assessment. Being open to a trade does not mean you trade everyone.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

GMs don't want to acquire big money contracts that don't to fit into their cap structure and might hamper the team.

Acquiring Rasmus Andersson for $4.55M is not that scenario. It doesn't prevent you from re-signing your own players, it provides you value in that position that helps your cap allocation doesn't hurt it.

That depends on what your cap situation actually is. You underestimate just how much cap trouble contenders have been in in recent years.

Being open to trading any player is not the same as trading any player. Everything should be a constant evaluation when you are rebuilding, and nobody should be off limits.

Yet you assume, based on the fact that the player was not traded, that the team was not open to trading him.

The answer when a team calls you with interest in a player should never be "we aren't interested in moving that player", it should be "What are you willing to pay"

Do you honestly expect that answer to be published in the media for the fans? Do you, in fact, have any information AT ALL about what conversations Conroy has with other GMs?

And then you make that assessment. Being open to a trade does not mean you trade everyone.

Yet here you are complaining because a particular player was not traded at the time you think he should have been, merely because you assume there was an offer that the team should have accepted in order to follow your plan.

So apparently if you don't trade everyone, according to you, that proves you were not open to a trade. Which is the exact opposite of what you just said. Pick a lane.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Sigh...he hadn't had a bad season yet at the 2024 draft. That would have been the 2025 draft, and I'm not surprised they weren't able to get full value for him then.

At the 2024 draft he was coming off 50, 49, and 39 point seasons. And with 2 years at $4.55M he would have been good value without retention, and would have been immaculate value with retention, especially with no NTC.

Why did you want him gone?

The biggest reasons the Flames want to trade Raz is they don't want to pay his extension price after a 31 point season and because the system now has their fill of RS defenseman, at the 24 draft they didn't.

Maybe you're a hockey Nostradamus

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Why did you want him gone?

The biggest reasons the Flames want to trade Raz is they don't want to pay his extension price after a 31 point season and because the system now has their fill of RS defenseman, at the 24 draft they didn't.

Maybe you're a hockey Nostradamus

There were people that were proponents of trading Ras at that time for a variety of reasons. It was clear the team was likely rebuilding, they already had Weegar locked up until he's 36, so signing another RH d-man from 30-38 was never going to make sense.

The feeling from then was always that Andersson would likely command $8M+, again something that didn't make sense for this team based on his age and Weegar already being locked up.

At that time the Flames had just acquired Brzustewicz, and Miromanov as RH d, and there was the potential they'd end up with a RH d-man at 9th OV since they would have known that Parekh was the guy they really liked at 9.

It would have hurt them for 24-25 for sure, because that roster was thin on d after losing Tanev, Hanifin, and Zadorov the prior season (and likely IMO why the Flames weren't looking to move Andersson at that time) but it would have been the right long term decision for the team IMO.