The 2025 NHL off-season is shaping up to be one of the most dynamic periods. It could potentially be transformative in recent memory. As teams look to retool, they aim to rebuild or make that final push for Stanley Cup contention. Therefore, the trade market is poised to be particularly active. This isn’t just about shuffling depth pieces. Several high-profile players find themselves at a crossroads. Franchise cornerstones and rising stars are facing rampant speculation about new beginnings in new cities.

Section 1: Setting the Stage: The 2025 Off-Season Trade Frenzy

The NHL off-season serves as a critical juncture for franchises to fundamentally reshape their rosters and strategic outlooks. Unlike the frantic, often short-term focus of the trade deadline, the summer months allow for more complex, future-oriented transactions. These deals frequently involve players with significant contract term, high-value prospects, and intricate salary cap considerations. The 2025 iteration of this off-season frenzy is noteworthy. It is driven by a confluence of factors that promise a robust trade market.  

A primary catalyst is the significant rise in the NHL salary cap. For the 2025-26 season, the upper limit is set to increase to $95.5 million, with a corresponding floor of $70.6 million. The new cap marks a substantial jump from the $88 million cap of the 2024-25 season. It provides teams with newfound financial flexibility. Projections indicate further growth, with the cap anticipated to reach $104 million for the 2026-27 season and $113.5 million for 2027-28. This escalating cap environment empowers more teams. They can absorb significant contracts or pursue high-impact players. These actions lack the same level of fiscal constraint seen in recent, flatter-cap years.  

A 2025 Unrestricted Free Agent (UFA) class compounds the effect of the rising cap. It is widely perceived as underwhelming. This perception is especially true after several notable players signed extensions. There is a scarcity of top-tier talent on the open market. Naturally, this shifts the focus towards trades as the primary avenue for substantial roster improvement. Teams aiming to make a notable impact may discover that the most influential players are available only through trade. This situation intensifies competition for these assets.  

The cap space across the league has increased. The UFA pool, however, is less-than-stellar. This combination could create a scenario where teams have specific, pressing needs, for example, a legitimate number-one center. Teams may also look for a top-pairing right-shot defenseman. In such cases, they are willing to pay a premium in trades. Free agency is a less appealing alternative for talent acquisition. As a result, the value of available trade targets who fit these critical molds can escalate. This is especially true when multiple teams vie for a scarce player archetype. The buzz around centers in a “thin” market gives considerable leverage to the selling teams.  

Furthermore, the expanding salary cap diminishes the “capped-out” excuse for some perennial contenders who have yet to achieve ultimate success. This financial breathing room may compel general managers of these ambitious franchises to pursue bolder, more transformative trades. The limited UFA options could push them to seek those bold moves rather than relying on incremental additions. The pressure to win now, with fewer financial handcuffs, intensifies the need for decisive action on the trade front.  

Teams in rebuilding phases with substantial cap space are in a strong position. Examples include the Anaheim Ducks, Chicago Blackhawks, and Utah Mammoth. They are not merely positioned to sign the available free agents. Their cap flexibility allows them to be crucial third-party facilitators in complex trades. They absorb unwanted contracts from cap-strapped teams. In return, they exchange for valuable future assets like draft picks and prospects. This “cap brokerage” role becomes even more significant when many contending teams are tight against the cap. They are eager to acquire specific players to bolster their lineups.  

The following table provides an overview of some key players who are expected to be prominent in trade discussions this off-season:

Table 1: Top 2025 Off-Season Trade Candidates Overview

Player	Position	Current Team	2025-26 Cap Hit (Current or Projected)	Contract Expiry (Year & Status)	Key Trade Clause	Brief Reason for Trade Buzz
Mitch Marner	RW	Toronto Maple Leafs	Pending UFA ($10.9M current)	UFA 2025	Full NMC	Leafs’ playoff struggles, contract demands, risk of UFA loss
Elias Pettersson	C	Vancouver Canucks	$11.6M	UFA 2032	NMC (July 1)	Performance dip, team dynamics, looming NMC activation
Erik Karlsson	D	Pittsburgh Penguins	$10M (Penguins’ portion)	UFA 2027	Full NMC	Penguins’ retool, cap relief, player desire for contender
John Gibson	G	Anaheim Ducks	$6.4M	UFA 2027	10-team NTC	Ducks’ rebuild phase, player’s desire for change
JJ Peterka	LW/RW	Buffalo Sabres	Pending RFA (Est. ~$8M)	RFA 2025	None	Player unhappiness, Sabres’ potential core shakeup
Marco Rossi	C	Minnesota Wild	Pending RFA (Est. ~$7M)	RFA 2025	None	Contract dispute, team needs, high demand for centers
Rasmus Andersson	D	Calgary Flames	$4.55M	UFA 2026	6-team NTC (July 1)	Flames’ rebuild, one year left before UFA
Bowen Byram	D	Buffalo Sabres	Pending RFA	RFA 2025	None	Sabres’ logjam on LD, contract status, high potential
Alex Tuch	RW	Buffalo Sabres	$4.75M	UFA 2026	None	Sabres’ potential core shakeup, one year left on deal
Jonathan Marchessault	RW	Nashville Predators	$5.5M	UFA 2029	Unknown	Predators’ need to get younger, player open to move

Section 2: Headliners on the Block: Marquee Players Eyeing New Arenas?

Among the many names circulating in the rumor mill, a few stand out. This is due to their star power and contract situations. Their departures could cause potential seismic shifts.

A. Mitch Marner (Toronto Maple Leafs)

Mitch Marner’s future with the Toronto Maple Leafs is arguably the most captivating storyline heading into the off-season. The star winger is a pending Unrestricted Free Agent (UFA) as his six-year, $65.4 million contract ($10.9 million AAV) concludes after the 2024-25 season. Reports suggest Marner is seeking a new deal in the neighborhood of $14 million per year. Such a figure would place him among the league’s elite earners and, critically, could surpass teammate Auston Matthews’ $13.25 million AAV, a scenario viewed as problematic within the Leafs organization.  

The most significant factor in any Marner trade discussion is his full No-Movement Clause (NMC). This clause grants him complete authority over his destination. He reportedly exercised this right. He refused to waive the NMC for a proposed trade involving Mikko Rantanen. This occurred at the 2025 Trade Deadline.  

Several factors fuel the speculation of Marner’s departure. The Maple Leafs’ consistent playoff shortcomings continue to raise concerns. Marner’s individual performance in crucial games often faces scrutiny. This situation raises questions about the viability of the team’s high-priced “Core Four.” This group consumes approximately 40% of the salary cap. The negotiation on a new contract is at an impasse. His reported asking price complicates the matter. It contrasts with the Leafs’ likely ceiling, especially in relation to Matthews. There’s a palpable risk of Toronto losing a star asset for nothing but cap space. This risk occurs if Marner remains unwilling to waive his NMC. He might not re-sign. Consequently, a “fresh start” might appeal to Marner. It allows him to escape the intense Toronto spotlight. It could benefit the Maple Leafs organization, providing an opportunity to reshape the team’s identity and on-ice dynamics.  

Marner’s situation is a classic example of the “hometown hero” dilemma reaching a critical juncture. The intense pressure on homegrown stars in major Canadian markets is immense. His reported refusal to waive his NMC suggests a player either profoundly committed to making it work in Toronto. Despite the team’s struggles, the situation also implies a player who is leveraging his contractual power. This player does so to its absolute fullest. If he leverages his power completely, it might be a warning. He must adapt to the team’s broad strategic needs. This example might shape how NHL teams approach NMC negotiations with future star players. GMs across the league will observe this situation closely. It might lead to demands for more conditional clauses. Teams may also propose shorter NMC durations in future high-value contracts, particularly in high-pressure environments.

Given his talent and the buzz, several teams are considered potential suitors:

Table 2A: Potential Landing Spot Analysis for Mitch Marner

Potential Team	Key Rationale (Need, Cap, Strategy)	Potential Trade Structure (Sign-and-trade, UFA signing)	Key Obstacles/Considerations
Vegas Golden Knights	Win-now mode, history of aggressive moves. Previous interest in a 3-team deal. Needs dynamic offense.	Sign-and-trade likely due to cap constraints.	Limited cap space (~$9.6M-$10.5M). Would require significant salary out (e.g., W. Karlsson, Stone, Theodore have NTCs/NMCs). Marner’s NMC.
Anaheim Ducks	Massive cap space (~$38.7M). Team on the rise, quieter market. Can “overpay.”	UFA signing or sign-and-trade.	Marner’s willingness to join a team still a couple of years from serious contention. Culture shock from Toronto market. Marner’s NMC.
Chicago Blackhawks	Significant cap space (~$30.3M). Need to surround Bedard with elite talent. Marner as a “Tavares-like” veteran addition for a young core.	UFA signing or sign-and-trade.	Ensuring Marner sees Chicago as a competitive step. Marner’s NMC.
Utah Mammoth	New franchise, ample cap space (~$20.1M-$21.2M). Aiming for a “mammoth splash”. Aggressive off-season plans.	UFA signing or sign-and-trade.	Building a competitive team quickly enough to satisfy Marner. Marner’s NMC.
Detroit Red Wings	Desperate for playoffs, need star power. Cap space (~$24.2M) but might need to move contracts.	UFA signing or sign-and-trade.	Offloading existing contracts to comfortably fit Marner’s expected salary. Marner’s NMC.
Carolina Hurricanes	Perennial contender needing more offensive pop. Previous interest (Rantanen talks). Cap space (~$29M-$31.9M).	UFA signing or sign-and-trade.	Convincing Marner Carolina is the best fit for a Cup run. Marner’s NMC.
Los Angeles Kings	GM “hunting big game”. Cap space (~$26.3M). Marner reportedly prefers US teams if leaving Toronto.	UFA signing or sign-and-trade.	Aligning on contract terms and role within the Kings’ structure. Marner’s NMC.

B. Elias Pettersson (Vancouver Canucks)

Another marquee name creating significant buzz is Vancouver Canucks center Elias Pettersson. In March 2024, Pettersson inked a substantial eight-year, $92.8 million contract extension, carrying an $11.6 million AAV through the 2031-32 season. The 2024-25 campaign was challenging for him. His production dipped to 15 goals and 45 points in 64 games. This was a stark contrast to his 102-point output in 2022-23.  

A critical date looms: July 1, 2025, when a full No-Movement Clause (NMC) in his contract activates. This impending clause is a major driver of trade speculation.  

The reasons for a potential Pettersson trade are multifaceted. His significant performance decline, which included drops in underlying metrics like shot velocity and skating speed, has raised concerns. Past personality clashes within the team have also been noted. Trading him before his NMC activates on July 1 would provide the Canucks with maximum flexibility. They would have more options in seeking a return and choosing a trade partner. Adding fuel to the fire, Pettersson was conspicuously absent from recent Canucks marketing materials. Other team stars like Thatcher Demko were also absent. This led to widespread speculation about internal discord. Some believe the team is quietly gauging his trade value. Furthermore, a “fix him” mentality has reportedly emerged among other NHL GMs. They believe a change of scenery to a less intense market could help Pettersson rediscover his elite form. He is still only 26.  

Pettersson’s situation presents a fascinating “contract year performance vs. long-term bet” conundrum. After signing a massive extension, his output significantly dipped immediately. This occurred just before his NMC restricts team options. It creates a high-stakes scenario. For the Canucks, the decision is whether to trade him now and potentially sell low. This move would retain flexibility. Alternatively, they could bet on a rebound, despite the shadow of his new contract and NMC. For any acquiring team, the challenge is to determine if his down year was an anomaly. They must also assess if it is a concerning new trend for a player commanding an $11.6 million cap hit for seven more seasons. The urgency imposed by the NMC activation date makes this a particularly pressing issue for all parties involved.

While the Canucks have not publicly stated Pettersson is available, the rumor mill is active:

Table 2B: Potential Landing Spot Analysis for Elias Pettersson

Potential Team	Key Rationale (Need, “Fix Him” Angle, Assets)	Potential Trade Structure (Player-for-player, package involving picks/prospects)	Key Obstacles/Considerations
Buffalo Sabres	Fans openly hopeful. Sabres seeking significant roster changes to end playoff drought.	Package likely involving high draft picks, prospects, and potentially a roster player.	Pettersson’s willingness to go to Buffalo. Canucks’ asking price. The July 1 NMC deadline.
Philadelphia Flyers	Fan interest. Presence of former Canucks coach Rick Tocchet could be a factor in assessing Pettersson’s fit.	Similar to Buffalo, a package of futures and/or roster players.	Pettersson’s willingness. Canucks’ valuation. The July 1 NMC deadline.
Minnesota Wild	Mentioned in a hypothetical Marco Rossi swap, but deemed unlikely due to value disparity and Canucks’ needs at center.	Highly unlikely as a centerpiece trade for Pettersson.	Would require significant additional assets from Minnesota, which they may lack.
General Suitors	Teams needing a high-upside #1 center, willing to gamble on a rebound, with significant cap space and assets.	Likely a multi-asset package including a top prospect, high draft pick(s), and possibly a roster player.	Pettersson’s $11.6M AAV for 7 more years. The risk associated with his recent performance. The July 1 NMC deadline is paramount for maximizing Vancouver’s leverage and options. Pettersson’s own desires post-NMC activation.

The potential movement of stars like Marner or Pettersson would inevitably send ripples across the league. If Marner joins a contender like Vegas, it would solidify their status as a Western Conference powerhouse. This move might compel other top Western teams like Edmonton, Colorado, or Dallas. They may need to re-evaluate their rosters. Strategies might also be adjusted to keep pace. Similarly, if Pettersson joins an Eastern Conference team such as Buffalo, it could significantly aid their rebuild. This trade could alter the competitive landscape within the Atlantic Division. Rivals like Toronto, Florida, and Boston might be impacted. These are not isolated events. The trade of one superstar can trigger a cascade of reactions. Numerous other teams may make strategic adjustments in response. 

Section 3: High-Impact Players Facing Uncertain Futures

Beyond the headline-grabbing names, several other impactful players are subjects of intense trade speculation. This is due to their contracts, team situations, or individual circumstances.

A. Erik Karlsson (Pittsburgh Penguins)

Veteran defenseman Erik Karlsson, now 34, remains a prominent figure in trade discussions. He is under contract through the 2026-27 season. His original $11.5 million cap hit saw $1.5 million retained by the San Jose Sharks, leaving the Pittsburgh Penguins with a $10 million cap hit. Critically, Karlsson’s actual salary owed decreases in the remaining years of his deal—$9 million for 2025-26 and $7.5 million for 2026-27. A $5 million bonus payment is due on July 1, 2025. After this payment, his remaining cash owed for the final two seasons will be $11.5 million (or $11 million per some sources) , making him a more financially attractive asset post-bonus. Karlsson has a full No-Movement Clause (NMC). However, he is willing to waive it for a legitimate Stanley Cup contender. In the 2024-25 season, he recorded 11 goals and 53 points.  

The Penguins, under GM Kyle Dubas, are in a retooling phase. They aim to get younger, acquire draft capital, and achieve greater financial flexibility. Moving Karlsson’s substantial cap hit is a key part of this strategy, as he doesn’t align with their current timeline. Karlsson himself appears open to a move to a contending team.  

Karlsson’s situation is emblematic of the challenges NHL teams face with aging superstars on massive contracts. This is especially true when the team is not contending. While his actual salary is diminishing, the $10 million cap hit for Pittsburgh remains a significant hurdle. The Penguins may need to retain salary, or an acquiring team might need to accept other “problematic” contracts. This necessity demonstrates that even for a three-time Norris Trophy winner, age and cap burden can considerably dilute trade value. This often forces the selling team into less-than-ideal compromises to achieve their primary objectives of cap relief and roster re-composition.

Potential destinations include:

• Detroit Red Wings: Detroit has some less desirable contracts (e.g., Justin Holl, Vladimir Tarasenko) that could be part of a package, potentially allowing Pittsburgh to clear Karlsson’s cap hit in exchange for taking on short-term deals plus assets. Alternatively, if Pittsburgh retains salary (e.g., $3 million, bringing Karlsson’s AAV to $7 million for an acquirer), they could receive a young player like Michael Brandsegg-Nygard or a mid-round pick in return.  
• Carolina Hurricanes: With Brent Burns potentially departing via free agency, Carolina might seek an offensive boost from their blue line. A “hockey trade” scenario has been floated. Jesperi Kotkaniemi, who is young but overpaid, could head to Pittsburgh. He could use a fresh start in a deal for Karlsson.  
• Toronto Maple Leafs: Frank Seravalli speculated a one-for-one swap with Morgan Rielly. However, this is considered highly improbable due to Rielly’s NMC. Toronto also has specific needs. (It’s not happening).
• Florida Panthers & Ottawa Senators: Mentioned by commentators as other possibilities, though the fit and feasibility vary.  

Pittsburgh’s willingness to retain salary or take on other contracts will play a crucial role in any trade. The July 1 bonus payment is a key timing element.  

B. John Gibson (Anaheim Ducks)

Anaheim Ducks goaltender John Gibson, 31, has been a fixture on trade bait lists for some time. He is signed through the 2026-27 season with an AAV of $6.4 million and has a 10-team no-trade list. His 2024-25 stats were solid, with a reported.912 save percentage and 2.77 goals-against average.  

The primary driver for a potential trade is the Ducks’ ongoing rebuild. Gibson’s timeline may not align with when the team expects to be a serious contender again. However, recent reports suggest Anaheim aims to accelerate this timeline. Gibson himself is reportedly receptive to a move to a contending team. The emergence of younger goaltender Lukas Dostal also plays a role, potentially making Gibson expendable. However, some suggest the Ducks might prefer to run Gibson and Dostal in tandem. Alternatively, they may wait to assess Dostal’s progress in the first half of the upcoming season. Only then would they consider a Gibson trade at the deadline.  

Gibson’s long-rumored availability and Anaheim’s extensive rebuilding phase illustrate the delicate balance teams must strike with veteran goaltenders. While a stable, experienced netminder can be an asset, Gibson’s $6.4 million cap hit could be reallocated to address other roster deficiencies. The rise of a capable younger goalie like Dostal often serves as the catalyst for such considerations. However, the Ducks’ apparent patience is evident. It may also be the difficulty in finding a trade that offers fair value. This situation shows the complexities of the goalie market. Teams are often hesitant to overpay for veteran goaltenders who are not in the absolute elite tier. The selling team understandably wants a return that matches a starting goalie’s value. This can lead to a protracted situation where the “right offer” takes time to materialize.  

Betting odds have placed the Edmonton Oilers as the most likely destination (+200) , who urgently need to solidify their goaltending to maximize their chances with Connor McDavid. A hypothetical trade could see Stuart Skinner move to Anaheim. Other potential suitors include the Carolina Hurricanes (+500), and longshots Utah Mammoth (+1800) and Gibson’s hometown Pittsburgh Penguins (+2050). Gibson’s manageable cap hit and NTC will give him some influence over his next stop.  

C. JJ Peterka (Buffalo Sabres)

Dynamic forward JJ Peterka of the Buffalo Sabres is another compelling trade candidate. The 23-year-old is a pending Restricted Free Agent (RFA). He had a breakout 2024-25 season. During that season, he posted 27 goals and 68 points. He is projected to command a long-term contract around an $8 million AAV.  

The trade buzz surrounding Peterka is intense. Reports suggest his unhappiness with the franchise’s lack of progress. The extended 14-year playoff drought also fuels this discontent. Sabres GM Kevyn Adams has publicly stated no intention to trade Peterka. Despite this, the sentiment persists that a “change of scenery is in order”. Another team could threaten with an offer sheet when he becomes an RFA on July 1. This offer sheet could force Buffalo’s hand. His agent, Allan Walsh, is reportedly driving the trade talk. This aligns with the Sabres contemplating a significant core reshuffle.  

Peterka’s situation underscores the power of player discontent. When combined with RFA status, it can force a team’s hand. This situation may lead to a trade that management had not initially planned or desired. This is especially true for a franchise like Buffalo. The team has endured a prolonged period of struggle. This situation makes it more challenging to convince players to remain committed to “the process.” The leverage an unhappy RFA holds, especially one of Peterka’s caliber, can sometimes override a team’s preferred strategy.

Several teams have expressed interest:

• The New York Rangers reportedly made a substantial offer. They included a roster player plus a first-round pick before the trade deadline. They could revisit their interest.  
• The New Jersey Devils could offer a strong compensation package. They should be aggressive in their pursuit.  
• The Seattle Kraken have been discussed in fan circles as a fit. Potential packages may involve a roster player, a top prospect, and multiple first-round picks.  

Acquiring Peterka would require a significant trade package and the willingness to meet his RFA contract demands. Given his age, production, and high ceiling, multiple teams made “significant offers” at the deadline, indicating a competitive market.  

Section 4: Other Notable Names in the Rumor Mill

Beyond the headliners, a host of other talented players find their names swirling in off-season trade speculation.

A. Marco Rossi (Minnesota Wild)

The 23-year-old center is a pending RFA after a 24-goal, 60-point season. Rossi himself cast doubt on his Minnesota future. There is reportedly a “gap” in contract expectations. The Wild may be hesitant about his desired seven-year, $49 million deal. This hesitation comes after he was moved to the fourth line during the playoffs. In a thin market for centers, Rossi is highly coveted. He could command a return similar to the Kevin Fiala trade. The Vancouver Canucks are mentioned as potential suitors. They would likely be involved as part of a larger package, rather than a direct swap for Pettersson. Teams needing a skilled second-line center will be monitoring his situation closely. The Anaheim Ducks, potentially looking to add a young center, could also be a fit.  

Rossi’s situation, along with that of Bowen Byram (discussed below), exemplifies a common off-season pressure point: the RFA squeeze. Teams aim to retain young, promising talent. However, discrepancies in perceived value or contract demands can make these players prime trade targets. If a player is also organizationally blocked, the impetus to trade can grow. The same happens if there’s a risk of an offer sheet. This allows the team to secure a known return. It’s preferable to this than risking losing the player for potentially less appealing fixed compensation or in a forced decision.

B. Rasmus Andersson (Calgary Flames)

The 28-year-old right-shot defenseman has one year remaining on his contract at a $4.55 million AAV before becoming a UFA in 2026. A six-team no-trade clause activates on July 1. After a season where his offensive numbers dipped and his season-ending media availability “felt like a farewell,” the Flames, who are focused on the future, might look to trade him if an extension (for which he’s eligible July 1, with projections around 7 years, $8.5M AAV) isn’t viable. Andersson is a proven top-four defenseman with leadership qualities. Potential destinations include the Buffalo Sabres. They need a right-shot D and could send Bowen Byram in return. The Carolina Hurricanes might be interested if they lose defensemen in free agency. Toronto Maple Leafs is a possibility since GM Treliving drafted him, but assets are an issue. Dallas Stars might target RFA Mavrik Bourque. The Montreal Canadiens have assets and need a RHD. The Ottawa Senators are reportedly on his no-trade list.  

Andersson’s status is intriguing. He is a player with one year left on his deal before UFA eligibility. For contending teams, he represents a valuable addition without the burden of a long-term commitment, ideal for a playoff push. For the selling Flames, if an extension seems unlikely, they should trade him now. It’s better to do this than potentially lose him for nothing in free agency. This often leads to more reasonable acquisition costs. It is a balanced risk-reward proposition for buyers. Additionally, it provides strong motivation for sellers.

C. Bowen Byram (Buffalo Sabres)

The 23-year-old left-shot defenseman is a pending RFA. Acquired from Colorado in 2024, he posted a career-high 38 points in his first full NHL season. Despite his agent refuting trade request reports, Byram was eligible for an extension 10 months ago, and one hasn’t materialized. The Sabres are reportedly gauging the market for him. While he’s somewhat logjammed behind Rasmus Dahlin and Owen Power on the left side, he has played well with Dahlin. Buffalo ideally wants to sign him long-term. An 8-year, $8 million AAV deal has been suggested. However, a bridge deal leading to UFA status is a risk. He could be a key piece in a trade for a player like Rasmus Andersson. Byram was a former 4th overall pick in 2019. His potential hasn’t been fully unlocked due to past injuries. He remains an intriguing asset.  

The Buffalo Sabres are a focal point of many trade discussions, not just concerning Byram but also Peterka and Tuch. Their prolonged 14-season playoff drought and reported player discontent create a high “desperation index”. They might become active sellers. They could trade players like Peterka, Tuch, or Byram if they feel changes are necessary. The team might also trade them if players want out. Simultaneously, this desperation could drive them to be aggressive buyers. They might potentially overpay or take on significant risks, like acquiring Andersson. This could alter their trajectory and appease a frustrated fanbase and ownership. This dual role makes Buffalo a dynamic variable in the off-season trade market.  

D. Alex Tuch (Buffalo Sabres)

The 28-year-old right winger has one year remaining on his contract at a $4.75 million AAV and is coming off a 46-48 point season. Tuch is another Sabre who could be traded because of a core shakeup. This shakeup aims to end the franchise’s lengthy playoff drought. It also aims to build for the future. The Montreal Canadiens previously had discussions with Buffalo before the Dylan Cozens trade. They have been mentioned as a team that could target Tuch. This could happen if talks resume.  

E. Other Names Briefly Mentioned:

It’s crucial to note the status of some players who were prominent on earlier trade bait lists but whose situations have since changed:

• Dylan Cozens (BUF): Has already been traded to the Ottawa Senators in a significant deal involving Josh Norris.  
• Seth Jones (CHI): Was traded to the Florida Panthers.  
• Mikko Rantanen (COL/CAR): Was traded from Colorado to Carolina, and then subsequently flipped to the Dallas Stars.  
• Martin Necas (COL/CAR): Initially, he was reported as unhappy in Colorado. He was part of the trade that sent Rantanen to Carolina. Then Necas was involved in Rantanen’s subsequent move to Dallas. He was potentially on the block again from Carolina. His exact status post-initial trade from Colorado needs careful tracking. Anaheim might target him as a potential team.  

Other players consistently appearing on trade boards include:

• K’Andre Miller (NYR): A young defenseman who is an RFA in 2025. He may be targeted by teams like Anaheim if they seek defensive upgrades.  
• Jonathan Marchessault (NSH): The 34-year-old winger has four years left at $5.5 million AAV. With Nashville looking to get younger, Marchessault is reportedly open to a move after just one season there.  
• Goaltenders: John Gibson (ANA) is a primary name, but Elvis Merzlikins (CBJ), with a $5.4 million AAV through 2027, is also on watch lists.  
• Defensemen: Connor Murphy (CHI) with one year left at $4.4 million AAV , and Rasmus Ristolainen (PHI) with two years left at $5.1 million AAV are also potential trade pieces.  
• Forwards: Morgan Geekie (BOS – RFA 2025) is frequently mentioned. Jean-Gabriel Pageau (NYI – 1 year left, $5M AAV, 16-team NTL) is also frequently noted. Brandon Tanev (SEA – UFA 2025) appears often in discussions. Brock Boeser (VAN – UFA 2025) is a potential target for Utah and is frequently mentioned.  

Section 5: Navigating the Off-Season: Key Factors and Final Thoughts

The 2025 NHL off-season is set against a backdrop of significant financial changes. There are also competitive shifts. These factors create a fertile ground for a lively trade market. Several key factors will dictate the flow and nature of player movement.

Recap of Key Market Drivers:

• Salary Cap Increase: The jump to a $95.5 million ceiling provides numerous teams with enhanced spending power. This change potentially fuels more aggressive trade pursuits. Teams now have the ability to absorb larger contracts.  
• Team Needs & Competitive Windows: The strategic posture of each team will heavily influence their trade activity.
  • Contenders like Edmonton, Carolina, Dallas, and Vegas will actively seek to acquire missing pieces. They may take on salary or leverage future assets to achieve this.  
  • Rebuilding or Retooling Teams such as Pittsburgh, Anaheim, and Calgary will focus on shedding salary. They will also concentrate on accumulating draft picks and prospects. Additionally, they will strategically weaponize their cap space.  
  • Teams on the Cusp or Under Pressure, like Buffalo, may make bold moves to either break through to playoff contention. New entities like Utah, seeking to establish an identity, may make a statement.  
• Player Contract Statuses:
  • Pending UFAs like Mitch Marner are central to potential sign-and-trade scenarios. They will create significant cap openings if they depart via free agency.  
  • Pending RFAs such as JJ Peterka, Marco Rossi, and Bowen Byram are prime trade targets. This happens if contract extensions prove difficult. It also occurs if the threat of an offer sheet looms large.  
  • No-Movement/No-Trade Clauses are in place for key players like Marner, Pettersson, Karlsson, Gibson, Andersson, and Kreider. These clauses will significantly dictate or limit potential trade destinations. They will also reduce the selling team’s leverage.  

In an environment where the salary cap is rising, many teams are still recovering from previous cap squeezes. The willingness to absorb another team’s “negative asset” can become a valuable trade chip. This could be an overpaid player or one with an undesirable contract term. It is advantageous for teams possessing ample cap space. This isn’t solely about acquiring star players; it’s also about facilitating other deals and accumulating assets. For example, if Pittsburgh wants to move Erik Karlsson, they might need the acquiring team. The acquiring team would need to take his full cap hit. Alternatively, a third team could be involved to absorb another contract to make the financials work. Teams with cap flexibility, such as Anaheim or Utah, can trade their financial leeway for draft picks or prospects. They effectively charge a premium for using their cap space to take on unwanted contracts.  

For teams managing talented RFAs like Peterka or Rossi, a complex strategic dilemma arises. If contract negotiations prove challenging, the team must decide on an approach. They must either trade the player for a known, negotiated return or risk an offer sheet. Offer sheet compensation is fixed by league rules. This compensation might be less than the player’s open market trade value. However, it forces a swift resolution. This “trade vs. offer sheet” game theory can often lead to preemptive trades. The original team seeks to control the return package. They prefer this control. It provides a way to avoid an offer sheet that might not match their specific rebuilding needs. They can also steer clear of retooling needs that don’t align. The mere threat of an offer sheet can be enough to push a team towards proactively exploring trade options.  

The rising salary cap may also begin to blur the traditional lines between “contender” and “rebuilder” trade strategies. Contenders have more financial room. They might find it easier to absorb a significant contract. This is possible if they believe that player is the final piece of their championship puzzle. Conversely, rebuilding teams are flush with cap space. They might be tempted to accelerate their timelines. They could acquire a disgruntled young star like Peterka or Rossi via trade. This approach is an alternative to solely focusing on accumulating draft picks. They can use their cap space as a weapon to outbid other suitors. They might absorb a contract as part of the deal. This allows them to fast-track a portion of their rebuild by acquiring proven young talent. This is instead of relying entirely on the uncertainties of the draft lottery. This creates a more dynamic marketplace with increased overlap in the types of players different teams might target.

The “domino effect” is another crucial aspect of the off-season trade market. One major trade, like the potential move of a Marner or Pettersson, can trigger a cascade of subsequent deals. This happens as other teams react to the shifting landscape. They adjust their strategies or see new opportunities emerge. For example, if a star winger is traded, the selling team now has a void to fill. They also have potentially new assets to spend. Meanwhile, the acquiring team might need to shed salary elsewhere. This is necessary to accommodate the new contract.

Concluding Thoughts on Most Probable/Impactful Trades:

Based on the sheer volume of rumors, the critical contract situations (pending UFA/RFA status, NMC activations), and clear team needs, several potential trades stand out as particularly likely or impactful:

• Mitch Marner: Given the contract impasse and the Leafs’ playoff frustrations, a change seems likely. Marner’s NMC supports the likelihood of a sign-and-trade or his departure as a UFA. Any move involving Marner will be monumental, significantly altering both the Leafs’ future and the acquiring team’s competitive standing.
• Erik Karlsson: The Penguins have a clear desire to retool and shed salary. This makes a Karlsson trade very likely. It is especially likely after his July 1 bonus is paid. The key will be the amount of salary retention or the nature of contracts Pittsburgh is willing to take back.
• Buffalo’s Young Guns (Peterka, Byram): The level of discontent is high. The Sabres’ desperation for change is evident. This makes it plausible that at least one of their high-potential young players is moved. As an RFA, Peterka seems particularly vulnerable to being traded. This could happen if an extension isn’t reached quickly. The threat of an offer sheet also adds to his vulnerability.
• John Gibson: While he’s been on the block before, the Ducks’ potentially accelerating rebuild might finally lead to a deal. Gibson desires a contending team. This could align well, especially with teams like Edmonton in clear need of goaltending stability. With that being said, Anaheim is a team on the rise. With their young talented players and a mix of veterans, they are on the path to success. New coach Joel Quenneville adds strategic expertise. It would be unwise for them to move John now.

The 2025 NHL off-season is primed for significant player movement. A rising salary cap, a potentially underwhelming UFA class, and several high-profile players in states of flux all contribute. These factors create an environment ripe for a dynamic and impactful trade market. General managers will need to be strategic. They must be creative and perhaps even audacious. This will help them navigate these waters successfully and position their teams for future success. The next few months promise to be fascinating for NHL fans as the league’s landscape potentially undergoes a considerable transformation.

*Chris Kreider was initially on this list but he waived his no trade clause and was dealt to Anaheim before this was posted*