2024/2025 Season trade rumours and speculation thread

[Ba'alzamon]

Originally Posted by ForeverFlameFan

To VAN: Byram
To BUF: Nemec + 2026 1st (NJD)

Byram was recently traded straight-across for Casey Mittelstadt. Pretty sure Nemec alone would be more than enough.

[CliffFletcher]

Byram is actually one of the rare cases of a player improving his stock since he went to Buffalo. He’s a better player and more valuable asset than when he was dealt for Mittlestadt (whose value has gone the other way). Power still has a lot of runway, but atm Byram is the second best d-man on the Sabres. And he’s still only 23.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Even if Marner is a better idea than Barzal, that doesn't make Marner a good idea.

The right answer here is neither of these guys.

I am in no way attacking you or your words here. I am quoting you because your post embodies a trend on CP... or maybe a long term standard is more like it.

Basically the Flames need better players. Better players get suggested and there are strong responses suggesting that all the better players are crap and the Flames would be better if they stayed away from those suggested.

Like, seriously. Cale Makar and Nathan MacKinnon could both be UFA and it gets reported that they're interested in going to the same team and some people here would be "No way! We don't want them" and come up with cons that probably don't even outweight the pros.

There is no perfect player and we aren't going to suddenly invent one. If someone like Barzal or Marner helps improve our club then shouldn't we be interested in what they could do for our team?

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by Buff

I am in no way attacking you or your words here. I am quoting you because your post embodies a trend on CP... or maybe a long term standard is more like it.

Basically the Flames need better players. Better players get suggested and there are strong responses suggesting that all the better players are crap and the Flames would be better if they stayed away from those suggested.

Like, seriously. Cale Makar and Nathan MacKinnon could both be UFA and it gets reported that they're interested in going to the same team and some people here would be "No way! We don't want them" and come up with cons that probably don't even outweight the pros.

There is no perfect player and we aren't going to suddenly invent one. If someone like Barzal or Marner helps improve our club then shouldn't we be interested in what they could do for our team?

I get what you're saying, but comparing both MacKinnon and Makar to Barzal and Marner is far from equal, so your point is lost a bit.

I'd avoid paying for both Barzal and Marner personally myself, but I'd take either MacKinnon or Makar in a heart beat as both players are undeniably better in all aspects and would change our franchise instantly. But that's because both players are impact players on their own. Where as I view both Marner and Barzal as complimentary pieces and not franchise players.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Buff

I am in no way attacking you or your words here. I am quoting you because your post embodies a trend on CP... or maybe a long term standard is more like it.

Basically the Flames need better players. Better players get suggested and there are strong responses suggesting that all the better players are crap and the Flames would be better if they stayed away from those suggested.

Like, seriously. Cale Makar and Nathan MacKinnon could both be UFA and it gets reported that they're interested in going to the same team and some people here would be "No way! We don't want them" and come up with cons that probably don't even outweight the pros.

There is no perfect player and we aren't going to suddenly invent one. If someone like Barzal or Marner helps improve our club then shouldn't we be interested in what they could do for our team?

It is not that simple.

The flames highest paid players are Huberdeau, Kadri, Weegar who are 32, 35, 32 next season and if they keep Andersson he will be entering that equation at 30 years old as well. If they end up giving Marner $14M per they are now paying a guy approaching 30 a huge amount when this team has missed the playoffs 3 years in a row and not really a piece or two away from being a cup contender.

Where this team is at currently it would be silly to give a UFA that is likely getting paid for what they have done with diminishing returns moving forward to try and get this current roster over the hump.

Adding a 21-25 year old and paying that guy top dollar does make sense for this team who is trying to turn over a core while remaining competitive. Adding more money and term to aging players doesn’t get this team to the cup

[Badgers Nose]

Cup? Woah there! Let's start with an entertaining team that makes the playoffs every year and worry about the Cup when that gets old.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Royle9

I get what you're saying, but comparing both MacKinnon and Makar to Barzal and Marner is far from equal, so your point is lost a bit.

I'd avoid paying for both Barzal and Marner personally myself, but I'd take either MacKinnon or Makar in a heart beat as both players are undeniably better in all aspects and would change our franchise instantly. But that's because both players are impact players on their own. Where as I view both Marner and Barzal as complimentary pieces and not franchise players.

I find that you present perfectly legit reasons why you would disagree with something. There are posters here who don't present valid reasons or at least they won't expand on their reasons. Some just feign disgust that a player was suggested and make a hard pass. Sometimes they pick out one little reason that probably doesn't make sense when compared to the pros and harp on that reason.

I also wasn't meaning to compare MacKinnon and Makar to Barzal and Marner, I was trying to use them as an extreme example. There are people on this site who would find a way to hate on the Flames getting a player who would push the needle.

Most days I read and scroll along. I must be tired today because I read and became triggered at that one comment in general. Not because enoch did or didn't have valid point but just because at that moment in time I felt the need to speak up against some of the negative approaches I see.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Why are the Devils giving up a boatload of assets for a guy they can sign for nothing in two years?

I'm not endorsing the trade specifics here, but time is always of the essence. The rest of his team isn't getting any younger, his goaltender situation 2 years out is a mystery, possibility of long term injuries etc...

If you think you can get Hughes, you do it now imo rather than waiting around for the goldilocks moment.

[The Cobra]

Signing a Marner is attempting to be a bubble team that scrapes its way into the playoffs and not having any long range plan to actually be a contender.

Which is the usual Calgary plan.

[1qqaaz]

I don't see any reasonable arguments for pursuing Marner over Makar next year other than the chance of Makar re-signing.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I also think you look at the spine of a team. The best way to build a team is:
C-C-D-G. #1 Center. #1/1A/#2 center. Defencemen. Goalie.


Adding Marner essentially creates this:
W-W-D-G. These are going to be the richest contracts on the team for the foreseeable future. If Parekh pans out (which I think he will), then the 'bulk' of you money is spent at these 4 positions in the 'spine' of your team.



I am sure there are exceptions that win the cup structured that way, but probably fewer. Ideally, whatever the Flames are in right now whether it is a rebuild or retool or whatever, they need to come out of this somehow looking like:

C-C-Parekh-Wolf.


Ideally #1 C - #1C/1B/Elite #2 C - Parekh - Wolf, with one high--money contract on the wings already with Huberdeau, which is fine. I just think it just becomes difficult having 2 of your highest AAV deals on the wings, especially when you don't even have a bona fide #2 C yet on the team or in the prospect pool. Just my thoughts, and I am sure there are always exceptions, but that's how I see it.

[traptor]

I'm torn on Marner, I see both sides of the argument.

That said, the Flames’ most glaring hole right now is elite talent up front, especially at center (assuming Parekh and Wolf pan out as expected).

There are really only three ways to acquire a true number one center (any player really):

Drafting
Trading / Offer Sheet
Signing in Free Agency (UFA)

Drafting a top-line center feels like a long shot. The Flames have no intention of bottoming out, so unless we luck into a star with a later pick, which we’re probably looking at a 3+ year development timeline.

Trading for one is risky. The kind of young centers that might be available often come with red flags, whether it’s size concerns, injury history, or off-ice attitude issues. Think Elias Pettersson (EP40) or Marco Rossi types.

Signing a elite UFA center isn’t a great bet either. Elite centers rarely hit the open market, and if they do, they’re older, expensive, and we’re probably not at the top of their destination list.

So if we’re not truly rebuilding and we desperately need elite offensive talent, I can understand the argument for going after Marner. Even if he’s not a center, he’d bring the high-end skill this team lacks, at least enough to make us competitive and push for the playoffs.

It wouldn’t stop us from continuing to pursue a top center through the other methods either. Acquisition cost is just cap.

In a perfect world, we’d land a top-3 pick and draft a ready-made elite center, but that’s just not what the team is planning to do.


I will be perfectly happy if they stand pat for UFA's though. Please for the love of god, don't go after one of those after guys like Bennet, Ehlers or Boeser though

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Signing a Marner is attempting to be a bubble team that scrapes its way into the playoffs and not having any long range plan to actually be a contender.

Which is the usual Calgary plan.

Flames were already a bubble team without Marner...really they were a WC team points wise. Marner might not be an answer but they also arent tanking .

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

I don't see any reasonable arguments for pursuing Marner over Makar next year other than the chance of Makar re-signing.

Well why not McDavid? The point is Marner will actually be available. Makar will almost certainly sign with the Avs.

[Lewis_D]

I'm tired of all this Marner talk, we need a Sec gif desperately right now!

[Igottago]

Originally Posted by Buff

I am in no way attacking you or your words here. I am quoting you because your post embodies a trend on CP... or maybe a long term standard is more like it.

Basically the Flames need better players. Better players get suggested and there are strong responses suggesting that all the better players are crap and the Flames would be better if they stayed away from those suggested.

Like, seriously. Cale Makar and Nathan MacKinnon could both be UFA and it gets reported that they're interested in going to the same team and some people here would be "No way! We don't want them" and come up with cons that probably don't even outweight the pros.

There is no perfect player and we aren't going to suddenly invent one. If someone like Barzal or Marner helps improve our club then shouldn't we be interested in what they could do for our team?

Not true. There are different classes of "better players", and obviously people are going to have preferences on who they want. The Flames were absolutely burned by giving the franchises highest ever contract to a "better player" in Huberdeau, isn't it obvious why people would be hesitant to see the team repeat a similar mistake? Handing out these contracts can be crippling to franchise development for years on end. If the Flames are going to be going after a big money player, the investment has to be worth it.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Buff

I find that you present perfectly legit reasons why you would disagree with something. There are posters here who don't present valid reasons or at least they won't expand on their reasons. Some just feign disgust that a player was suggested and make a hard pass. Sometimes they pick out one little reason that probably doesn't make sense when compared to the pros and harp on that reason.

I also wasn't meaning to compare MacKinnon and Makar to Barzal and Marner, I was trying to use them as an extreme example. There are people on this site who would find a way to hate on the Flames getting a player who would push the needle.

Most days I read and scroll along. I must be tired today because I read and became triggered at that one comment in general. Not because enoch did or didn't have valid point but just because at that moment in time I felt the need to speak up against some of the negative approaches I see.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

It is not that simple.

The flames highest paid players are Huberdeau, Kadri, Weegar who are 32, 35, 32 next season and if they keep Andersson he will be entering that equation at 30 years old as well. If they end up giving Marner $14M per they are now paying a guy approaching 30 a huge amount when this team has missed the playoffs 3 years in a row and not really a piece or two away from being a cup contender.

Where this team is at currently it would be silly to give a UFA that is likely getting paid for what they have done with diminishing returns moving forward to try and get this current roster over the hump.

Adding a 21-25 year old and paying that guy top dollar does make sense for this team who is trying to turn over a core while remaining competitive. Adding more money and term to aging players doesn’t get this team to the cup

In 27/28 if the Flames want to be a cap team they will have an almost impossible time accomplishing that unless they just light money on fire during the 2027 offseason. They won’t probably even be much above the salary floor given who they have to sign and what they will likely sign for. It could be as simple as determining that Marner is the best UFA that will be available over the next 3 offseason sand deciding that you might as well try for him. And he is young for a UFA and really good. That could be the thinking.

[The Cobra]

The chances of Marner choosing Calgary has got to be close to zero in any event.

[traptor]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

The chances of Marner choosing Calgary has got to be close to zero in any event.

I agree for the most part, but there are a few million reasons why Calgary could convince him that other teams may not be able or willing to do.