2025/2026 Season Trade Rumours and Speculation Thread

[Enoch Root]

I think the 'goal', for an Andersson trade, is pretty clear - Conroy wants one of two things:

1) a young C with the potential to be a #1
2) to move up in the draft, in order to get a chance at a young C

Since #1 is a rare commodity, #2 seems the more likely route. And as Jiri said, if the trade does involve moving up, then it almost certainly depends on who is available at that time. So if it is #2 (the more likely), it is unlikely that we see it prior to the actual draft.

[Roof-Daddy]

It'd be nice if everyone else would put wingnuts on their blocked list. Or at least stop quoting the super spammer.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by All In Good Time

Hey hey hey
Have a heart
It must be tough to touch grass when you have 3 profiles that each make 9 posts an hour

Almost 19,000 posts in less than three years. Wowza.

[Paulie Walnuts]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1938303073195069602

[bluejays]

With the now leaked info that some of the vets are available, I wonder given Conroy's track record if he's testing the waters for the eventual drip over the next year (barring someone blowing his expectations away). Teams hardly ever clear the decks in one year, and Conroy has been slowly getting rid of assets the past couple years. We know he has patients. I'm guessing that Andersson and maybe one vet is dealt this off-season. But a couple of them may be gone by the start of the October 2026 season. Today may be the spreading the word piece to prep them for it, but when it happens depends.

[SuperMatt18]

Wouldn't be surprised if Vegas had some trades lined up dependant on if Marner would go there and maybe Marner is going a different direction

[Tbull8]

Would be interesting if Marner goes to Dallas and then they move Robertson. Pretty good asset management by them if that happens. And having Marner and Rantanen as your top 2 wingers gives an interesting look

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Tbull8

Would be interesting if Marner goes to Dallas and then they move Robertson. Pretty good asset management by them if that happens. And having Marner and Rantanen as your top 2 wingers gives an interesting look

pushes their window in an even more immediate direction.
But I suppose they started that swapping Stankhoven for Rantanen.

[Toonage]

Would be a breath of fresh air seeing someone choose Dallas over Vegas.

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Dallas has less than a million left in cap. And that doesn't include Saad who they apparently signed.....(I'm dumb, but the point still stands).... They would need to get rid of a lot more than just Robertson to be able to fit in Marner. Dumba and Lyubushkin are obvious choices. With those three gone, it frees up $14.75MM. But, they'd still have to sign 5 more bodies to get to a 23 man roster if they traded 3 guys to bring in Marner. Teams seem to figure it out, but Marner to Dallas just doesn't seem plausible.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think the 'goal', for an Andersson trade, is pretty clear - Conroy wants one of two things:

1) a young C with the potential to be a #1
2) to move up in the draft, in order to get a chance at a young C

Since #1 is a rare commodity, #2 seems the more likely route. And as Jiri said, if the trade does involve moving up, then it almost certainly depends on who is available at that time. So if it is #2 (the more likely), it is unlikely that we see it prior to the actual draft.

Here is the thing though...Flames shouldn't limit themselves to those types of returns.

The teams that either have a higher pick in the draft, or a young C with potentiual to be #1 likely won't correlate with the teams willing to pay the most to add Andersson.

NHL managers always try to one stop shop and it's why trades are so hard to make.

Conroy's focus should be to maximize the return on Rasmus Andersson, even if the exact package doesn't meet his exact wants or criteria.

Then use the assets you have to get the center or higher pick you want from a different team.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

Dallas has less than a million left in cap. And that doesn't include Saad who they apparently signed. They would need to get rid of a lot more than just Robertson to be able to fit in Marner. Dumba and Lyubushkin are obvious choices. With those three gone, it frees up $14.75MM. But, they'd still have to sign 5 more bodies to get to a 23 man roster if they traded 3 guys to bring in Marner. Teams seem to figure it out, but Marner to Dallas just doesn't seem plausible.

Saad was re-signed by Vegas.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

Dallas has less than a million left in cap. And that doesn't include Saad who they apparently signed. They would need to get rid of a lot more than just Robertson to be able to fit in Marner. Dumba and Lyubushkin are obvious choices. With those three gone, it frees up $14.75MM. But, they'd still have to sign 5 more bodies to get to a 23 man roster if they traded 3 guys to bring in Marner. Teams seem to figure it out, but Marner to Dallas just doesn't seem plausible.

Saad signed with Vegas.... but ya, the Stars have no cap space for Marner. I think the Stars might be able to clear enough space to keep Granlund, maybe.

I hope Marner goes to the Blue Jackets, Sharks, or Blackhawks. Get those teams out of their rebuilds and, most importantly, don't let Vegas get him.

[YourMother]

I’ve seen a couple people mention the possibility of the sharks moving #2. Just curious why people might think that? Has San Jose openly mentioned this? If so, what do we figure they are looking for in return. If somehow, we finally get a #1 centre without giving up Parehk or Wolf, this will be a glorious time in flames history. Somehow a hole in the roster which we haven’t been able to fill since Nieuwendyk.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

Here is the thing though...Flames shouldn't limit themselves to those types of returns.

The teams that either have a higher pick in the draft, or a young C with potentiual to be #1 likely won't correlate with the teams willing to pay the most to add Andersson.

NHL managers always try to one stop shop and it's why trades are so hard to make.

Conroy's focus should be to maximize the return on Rasmus Andersson, even if the exact package doesn't meet his exact wants or criteria.

Then use the assets you have to get the center or higher pick you want from a different team.

People say this all the time, but it continues to rarely happen. Because players aren't poker chips.

[Tbull8]

Originally Posted by YourMother

I’ve seen a couple people mention the possibility of the sharks moving #2. Just curious why people might think that? Has San Jose openly mentioned this? If so, what do we figure they are looking for in return. If somehow, we finally get a #1 centre without giving up Parehk or Wolf, this will be a glorious time in flames history. Somehow a hole in the roster which we haven’t been able to fill since Nieuwendyk.

Its a pipe dream that a bunch of people (including myself) are holding onto. The price would be so absurd that it wouldnt make sense to do. It would likely cost Andersson, both 1sts, ++. But I'll keep dreaming until Misa inevitably goes to the Sharks at 2

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by YourMother

I’ve seen a couple people mention the possibility of the sharks moving #2. Just curious why people might think that? Has San Jose openly mentioned this? If so, what do we figure they are looking for in return. If somehow, we finally get a #1 centre without giving up Parehk or Wolf, this will be a glorious time in flames history. Somehow a hole in the roster which we haven’t been able to fill since Nieuwendyk.

It started with a message from Grier saying he was open to trading #2 if a team could blow his socks off.

Not much later there was a rumour that Ekblad and Andersson are on the top of the Sharks' wishlist.

[Demetric]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think the 'goal', for an Andersson trade, is pretty clear - Conroy wants one of two things:

1) a young C with the potential to be a #1
2) to move up in the draft, in order to get a chance at a young C

Since #1 is a rare commodity, #2 seems the more likely route. And as Jiri said, if the trade does involve moving up, then it almost certainly depends on who is available at that time. So if it is #2 (the more likely), it is unlikely that we see it prior to the actual draft.

I believe this to be too narrow a view, if a trade for a young top 4 LD or even a upgrade at another position come along that makes sense, they will take it.

[Matty81]

Kind of a dud of a day so far.. usually feels like this is one of the most heavy trade days of the year. Hopefully it picks up tonight, i hate how risk averse north American sports team managers are getting, trades are a huge part of the entertainment package and what makes it more interesting. Hearing lines like... we'll make a splash by using our draft picks is lame, even if it's what they need to say

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Demetric

I believe this to be too narrow a view, if a trade for a young top 4 LD or even a upgrade at another position come along that makes sense, they will take it.

It is narrow view time! Set your priorities and stick to them.

The Flames do not need G, RD, or Wingers. Adding to any of these positions would just deplete your trade chips and get you no closer to filling the positions that you are weak in.

Kadri
Frost
Backlund
Kirkland

That is a dismal C depth, even if Zary finds his way onto the list instead of staying on the wing, and there is no one in the pipeline that are likely to be top 6 C if Kadri and/or Backlund are traded or decline unexpectedly. (Also, Frost and Zary still do not have contracts)

We do have some good LD prospects but chances are low that they are going to become #1LD kind of players. It does make sense to be open to a LD upgrade as long as it doesn't cost you the trade chips needed to land the C depth we need.

If an Andersson trade starts a veteran exodus then that would change everything as it would result in the Flames holding a lot more trade chips. But as of today the assumption is that we do not have a lot of assets to work with that are in high demand.

Stay on target!