Speculation: 2026 NHL Draft June 26-27 (Flames Pick #6 OA)

[Fig]

The Flames Reddit is in uproar over this. They are all obsessed with Bjorck

There's a few interesting names in the RFA pile for C and others with term that seem like they could shake loose. I'd rather explore trades for 6OA for some of those guys than fixating on a specific player to draft.

This draft is going to be pure chaos and I'm confident Connie is well positioned to take advantage. I dunno if I should even bother guessing anymore. Connie gonna show up with an exciting gift we requested or show up with something unexpected that we would normally think nearly impossible.

I know the belief is we shouldn't rush rebuilds, but this is an ultra weird year where there's so many huge names on the table that are typically untouchables. If someone like Fantilli shakes free and somehow you can potentially add someone else like a Bourque, Hayton, Sillinger etc calibre C as well, that's an accelerated rebuild while maintaining a deep prospect pool, you have to think hard about it. It's a reasonable path to take to secure multiple top C, a young and balanced top 4 and we have our goalie tandem for the next while.

Usually one or two of those names are wishful thinking. This year there's probably like half a dozen of them who will change teams and it's already started with Eklund and McMichael.

 

[Mobiandi]

The Flames Reddit is in uproar over this. They are all obsessed with Bjorck

Helenius and Bjorck is a teeny tiny 1-2 punch. I doubt it

 

[Yepthatsme]

That's why I was wondering if we could influence Chicago and NYR with assets to not trade their picks and select dman instead of forwards. In theory it's cheaper than trading up. All teams still get BPA, but the Flames pay a cheaper price to shuffle around positional need to everyone's advantage.

Is there any precedent of a bribery trade in the NHL? Honest question because my mind is blanking on it. To me it just seems like tipping your hand to the other teams on who you want which NHL GMs typically avoid doing, even if I feel like everyone and their dog knows Calgary probably would prefer a forward.

With Buffalo in the top 4 I think the odds of the top 4 forwards being gone at 6 is now pretty plausible. I wonder if San Jose would bite on 6 for 9 and 27. It would guarantee they can get atleast one of Reid or Verheoff to still hunger their guy on top of Stenberg, we draft Lawrence, then package 27 and 30 to get into the low teens with whichever team is enamored by the Rucks.

 

[Darth Vladar]

Depending if our evaluation of Greenway is correct. But yikes. Especially since Boba wants like 10+ AAV.

I wonder what Nemec lands at... 7-8 AAV? Bridge or max term?

Definitely a bridge deal, just on principle alone. Can’t just walk onto our team fresh off your entry level deal expecting to be the highest paid dman with max term. I actually think Byram is a pretty decent comparable, he’s entering his second year of a two year deal worth $6.25M per. With the cap going up, I’d be ok with something like 3x7 for Nemec. Would still be RFA at the end of it.

 

[Fig]

Is there any precedent of a bribery trade in the NHL? Honest question because my mind is blanking on it. To me it just seems like tipping your hand to the other teams on who you want which NHL GMs typically avoid doing, even if I feel like everyone and their dog knows Calgary probably would prefer a forward.

With Buffalo in the top 4 I think the odds of the top 4 forwards being gone at 6 is now pretty plausible. I wonder if San Jose would bite on 6 for 9 and 27. It would guarantee they can get atleast one of Reid or Verheoff to still hunger their guy on top of Stenberg, we draft Lawrence, then package 27 and 30 to get into the low teens with whichever team is enamored by the Rucks.

To be honest, I've never heard of a pick involved, but there's plenty of old stories about some moves where afterwards GMs had an understanding that certain teams were supposed to pick certain players. And I somehow think I recall rumors where if a specific player wasn't taken, the teams do a "favor trade" later on? No idea which one I'm thinking of. Most teams pick swap to draft specific players rather than offer pucks not to draft a player, so I dunno.

With Buffalo moving into 4, I'm not convinced they stay at 4. If anything, I think it opens up Seattle and Winnipeg flexibility to make a swap move.

Definitely a bridge deal, just on principle alone. Can’t just walk onto our team fresh off your entry level deal expecting to be the highest paid dman with max term. I actually think Byram is a pretty decent comparable, he’s entering his second year of a two year deal worth $6.25M per. With the cap going up, I wouldn’t hate something like 3x7 for Nemec.

I can't stop thinking of Weegar. I think Nemec could flourish starting his Flames career emulating Weegar. I think a 6 x 6.25 contract, the one we gave to Weegar could be fair for both sides.

 

[Darth Vladar]

To be honest, I've never heard of a pick involved, but there's plenty of old stories about some moves where afterwards GMs had an understanding that certain teams were supposed to pick certain players. And I somehow think I recall rumors where if a specific player wasn't taken, the teams do a "favor trade" later on? No idea which one I'm thinking of. Most teams pick swap to draft specific players rather than offer pucks not to draft a player, so I dunno.

With Buffalo moving into 4, I'm not convinced they stay at 4. If anything, I think it opens up Seattle and Winnipeg flexibility to make a swap move.



I can't stop thinking of Weegar. I think Nemec could flourish starting his Flames career emulating Weegar. I think a 6 x 6.25 contract, the one we gave to Weegar could be fair for both sides.

You responded before I could edit with the tidbit about RFA lol. I think the rule is 27 years old or seven seasons in the league. Nemec would still be RFA at the end of a three year deal.

 

[Darth Vladar]

With Buffalo moving into 4, I'm not convinced they stay at 4. If anything, I think it opens up Seattle and Winnipeg flexibility to make a swap move.

Something around Hellebuyck maybe?

 

[Lunatik]

Figure SJs move today sort of locks in Stenberg at 2, right?

Grier probably figures he can get a D he likes at 9 like Verhoeff, Rudolph, Smits, Lin.

there is a rumor out there of a California team offering 2 firsts for Matthews... the Sharks are the only Cali team w/ multiple firsts. 2 and 9 for Auston Matthews?

 

[Fig]

Something around Hellebuyck maybe?

I don't think Helle would want to go to Buffalo. I'm thinking more like they'd try upgrading Perfetti.

4OA +? for Perfetti + 8OA sorta idea.

there is a rumor out there of a California team offering 2 firsts for Matthews... the Sharks are the only Cali team w/ multiple firsts. 2 and 9 for Auston Matthews?

Is the rumor two 2026 firsts? Or firsts in general? Future firsts are flying around with ease too.

I don't see the fit for SJS and the price seems so high. The only Cali team IMO that makes sense to add Matthew's is LA to replace Kopitar. I'd imagine both Ducks and Sharks would have a C involved in a Matthew's trade, not two first round picks.

 

[Lunatik]

I don't think Helle would want to go to Buffalo. I'm thinking more like they'd try upgrading Perfetti.

4OA +? for Perfetti + 8OA sorta idea.




Is the rumor two 2026 firsts? Or firsts in general? Future firsts are flying around with ease too.

I don't see the fit for SJS and the price seems so high. The only Cali team IMO that makes sense to add Matthew's is LA to replace Kopitar. I'd imagine both Ducks and Sharks would have a C involved in a Matthew's trade, not two first round picks.

well I think the fact the Sharks have 3 1st and 2 are in teh top 10 when Brady just returned 3 first (only 1 top 10), it first with the recent trend. If the Sharks added Matthews, all they'd need to do is develop Smith and Misa at wing, which was already happening to some degree already.

 

[AccordingtomySource]

there is a rumor out there of a California team offering 2 firsts for Matthews... the Sharks are the only Cali team w/ multiple firsts. 2 and 9 for Auston Matthews?

Could be. I haven’t seen that rumour, but it’s one out of left field.

Is Toronto that convinced they need to tear it back down to the studs (taking into account Reilly submitting his list of teams and Knies rumours too). It would be a heck of a change in Toronto and start to a rebuild/retool with McKenna, Stenberg and a D.

Thinking out loud, I think San Jose would be better off having one more solid draft to stockpile age appropriate assets and really solidify their status as a contender for a decade. But I also would have said Eklund would have been a big part of that.

It’s hard for me to imagine that has legs, but today has been bananas so nothing is off limits I guess.

 

[Fig]

well I think the fact the Sharks have 3 1st and 2 are in teh top 10 when Brady just returned 3 first (only 1 top 10), it first with the recent trend. If the Sharks added Matthews, all they'd need to do is develop Smith and Misa at wing, which was already happening to some degree already.

Sure, but the sharks need to address their mess on d vs adding more forward, no? It still doesn't make sense to me. For what I think I've read the sharks truly need.

Matthew's is a luxury for them. D corps is an urgency.

For LA centre is an urgency, not a need.

Based on your description, the ducks make more sense to chase Matthew's, maybe via McTavish. But a two firsts offer from the ducks is bizarre to me.

I dunno. I could be wrong. Agreed today is bonkers so maybe it indeed is the Sharks.

 

[Zirakzigil]

with Nemec on board I really hope they go Bjorck now.
TBH I always wanted them to go Bjorck but now they have an excuse.

Yeah drafting Verhoeff now makes zero sense. I really wonder about the Sharks and the 2nd now. They have two top 10 picks and could come away with some nasty defensemen and other assets if they drop back to 6th.

 

[Lunatik]

Sure, but the sharks need to address their mess on d vs adding more forward, no? It still doesn't make sense to me. For what I think I've read the sharks truly need.

Matthew's is a luxury for them. D corps is an urgency.

For LA centre is an urgency, not a need.

Based on your description, the ducks make more sense to chase Matthew's, maybe via McTavish. But a two firsts offer from the ducks is bizarre to me.

I dunno. I could be wrong. Agreed today is bonkers so maybe it indeed is the Sharks.

Rielly has been linked to the Sharks for a while too.
They just added Kesselring.
They still have Orlov, Dickinson and Mukhamullin

They also have more cap space than anyone in the NHL, so they can throw some bigger UFA contracts out there for a couple defensemen and a backup/1B goaltender.

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

Helenius and Bjorck is a teeny tiny 1-2 punch. I doubt it

Weird how half our fanbase is frothing at the mouth for Bjorck - Reschny - Potter down the middle, yet other teams maybe doing it is weird.

Also Buffalo has 6'3 McLeod, 6'2 Norris, 6'6 Thompson, and 6'1 Kullich all capable of playing center.

I do think Buffalo circles back on Robert Thomas now though. Might be hard for St. Louis to say no to a top 5 pick being involved

 

[Fig]

Rielly has been linked to the Sharks for a while too.
They just added Kesselring.
They still have Orlov, Dickinson and Mukhamullin

They also have more cap space than anyone in the NHL, so they can throw some bigger UFA contracts out there for a couple defensemen and a backup/1B goaltender.

Those aren't great names for D IMO, especially with what SJS could draft.

A SJS trade for Matthew's would create a top heavy scenario that challenges the Oilers.

I just don't see it. But if SJS does make that trade, I'll eat crow with a side of bewilderment.

 

[Lunatik]

Those aren't great names for D IMO, especially with what SJS could draft.

A SJS trade for Matthew's would create a top heavy scenario that challenges the Oilers.

I just don't see it. But if SJS does make that trade, I'll eat crow with a side of bewilderment.

The big difference is it's not top heavy contract wise and not full of shitty contracts for shitty D. It's also not purely 1 dimensional forwards that refuse to play defense. Also Askarov will be better than any goalie the Oilers have had since Cujo.

Those are also short term names in there. Orlov is a UFA after this year. Rielly has 4 years left, but the signing bonuses are all paid out now and money owned is lower than the AAV, which makes for better buyouts. (if bought out after 2 years, the penalties would only be 2 years @ 3.5 and 2 @ 2)

Dickinson is young and should be really good. Mukhamullin is developing decently IMO. Kesselring being healthy is a solid 3/4 option IMO.

If they threw coin at Jacob Trouba and Ras, then suddenly that D looks a hell of a lot better and has Orlov done soon and Rielly can be gone when you want him out.

 

[Lunatik]

@Fig I did add more lol

 

[Fig]

The big difference is it's not top heavy contract wise and not full of shitty contracts for shitty D. It's also not purely 1 dimensional forwards that refuse to play defense. Also Askarov will be better than any goalie the Oilers have had since Cujo.

Those are also short term names in there. Orlov is a UFA after this year. Rielly has 4 years left, but the signing bonuses are all paid out now and money owned is lower than the AAV, which makes for better buyouts. (if bought out after 2 years, the penalties would only be 2 years @ 3.5 and 2 @ 2)

Dickinson is young and should be really good. Mukhamullin is developing decently IMO. Kesselring being healthy is a solid 3/4 option IMO.

If they threw coin at Jacob Trouba and Ras, then suddenly that D looks a hell of a lot better and has Orlov done soon and Rielly can be gone when you want him out.

I personally wouldn't approach it that way. Didn't seem like Griers MO either.

I'd take those picks and chase rumored guys like Parayko and Werenski and build a more well balanced roster more dangerous than one spending those picks on Matthew's.

Grier did sign a bunch of UFA then flip them for assets though. Maybe you're right.

 

[Lunatik]

I personally wouldn't approach it that way. Didn't seem like Griers MO either.

I'd take those picks and chase rumored guys like Parayko and Werenski and build a more well balanced roster more dangerous than one spending those picks on Matthew's.

Grier did sign a bunch of UFA then flip them for assets though. Maybe you're right.

I'm not saying it would work wouldn't work, I just don't think it would be as bad as you're suggesting (or as bad as I took you suggesting lol), I just don't think it's like the Oilers at all.

 

[Fig]

I'm not saying it would work wouldn't work, I just don't think it would be as bad as you're suggesting (or as bad as I took you suggesting lol), I just don't think it's like the Oilers at all.

Fair. I guess I just view Dickenson, Muk and Kesselring as worse and more brutal deployment than that the Oilers were doing to their defense with guys like Broberg, Bouchard etc.

Not disagreeing that they have plenty of options and assets to address it after the trade. I'm saying if that roster being a potential snapshot in time would be more top heavy brutal than what the Oilers have ever deployed.

 

[Grinner]

Is there any precedent of a bribery trade in the NHL? Honest question because my mind is blanking on it. To me it just seems like tipping your hand to the other teams on who you want which NHL GMs typically avoid doing, even if I feel like everyone and their dog knows Calgary probably would prefer a forward.

With Buffalo in the top 4 I think the odds of the top 4 forwards being gone at 6 is now pretty plausible. I wonder if San Jose would bite on 6 for 9 and 27. It would guarantee they can get atleast one of Reid or Verheoff to still hunger their guy on top of Stenberg, we draft Lawrence, then package 27 and 30 to get into the low teens with whichever team is enamored by the Rucks.

As a Sharks fan. I and the majority of Sharks fans would make that trade

 

[Grinner]

well I think the fact the Sharks have 3 1st and 2 are in teh top 10 when Brady just returned 3 first (only 1 top 10), it first with the recent trend. If the Sharks added Matthews, all they'd need to do is develop Smith and Misa at wing, which was already happening to some degree already.

I personally wouldn't approach it that way. Didn't seem like Griers MO either.

I'd take those picks and chase rumored guys like Parayko and Werenski and build a more well balanced roster more dangerous than one spending those picks on Matthew's.

Grier did sign a bunch of UFA then flip them for assets though. Maybe you're right.

the Sharks aren't trading for Mathews

 

[Lunatik]

the Sharks aren't trading for Mathews

cool? just talking about a rumors... no one is saying it will or won't hapen

 

[Grinner]

cool? just talking about a rumors... no one is saying it will or won't hapen

Knock yourself out