What decade will that happen it?
- RogerRoeper

NHL goes in cycles, remember the last 50 years of Leafs glory?

What decade will that happen it?
- RogerRoeper

Pittsburgh was dead in the water until they got Crosby.

Having great players and a winning team changes everything in a hurry.

This is exactly why the NHL always made it easy for a last place team to get the 1st overall picks.

Lot 9 is an easy drinking pilsner, but just happens to be my favourite of all the beers that taste roughly the same ie. steamwhistle, moosehead, sleeman, etc.
- TheMussel

So you are paying extra money for a beer that tastes the same as discount pilsner?

People said that about the Leafs in 2006. 1996. 1986. 1976. 1966 (they were right).

Coyotes will make money when they start winning or get a new arena in a new location.

But at the end of the day, the Coyotes always have to spend at least 50-60 million to get to the cap floor. They'll break the bank for Matthews if they get the chance, especially if the rest of their team is on ELC. And once they start winning, they'll make much more money than today.
- JohnFergusonJr

No they don't

I'd let Matthews walk to play with his hometown Coyotes as a UFA, we'll have McDavid and Domi signing with their hometown Leafs anyway.

So you are paying extra money for a beer that tastes the same as discount pilsner?
- Atomic Wedgie

Yup.

It makes me feel like a big man.

It's the thing I don't get about Cherry haterz - why do you need to take the guy seriously?

Listen to him ramble on like an old man for seven minutes. Agree, disagree, laugh, admire his sartorial style.

He's harmless.
- Atomic Wedgie

He’s great, I don’t get the guys who bash him. Makes them feel good to notice a few errors an 80 year old makes?, forgetting he’s still 10x smarter about hockey then most of them. ( including me )

Pittsburgh was dead in the water until they got Crosby.

Having great players and a winning team changes everything in a hurry.

This is exactly why the NHL always made it easy for a last place team to get the 1st overall picks.
- JohnFergusonJr

There's some big problems in Arizona other than a losing product.

Their arena situation is their biggest obstacle. Both the City of Phoenix and the State of Arizona have said they aren't going to pay for a new arena. The Suns don't have any interest in going halvsies. The uncertainty of where they will play (iirc, they are now on a 1-year lease) has to hurt their longterm planning.

And the non-traditional market is also a big hurdle.

Having said that, it sounds like the new owner will be infinitely better than the old one, so there is hope.

It's the thing I don't get about Cherry haterz - why do you need to take the guy seriously?

Listen to him ramble on like an old man for seven minutes. Agree, disagree, laugh, admire his sartorial style.

He's harmless.
- Atomic Wedgie

My friends and I always get a kick out of his pronunciations of names, he's so far off on most of them these days it's hilarious. Just have to shake your head and laugh. It's pretty much the only part of his segment that is entertaining these days.

He’s great, I don’t get the guys who bash him. Makes them feel good to notice a few errors an 80 year old makes?, forgetting he’s still 10x smarter about hockey then most of them. ( including me )
- Garnie

He's still the man.

He's still the man.
- lonnyBohonos

I wouldn’t cross him either, probably still throws a mean right

My friends and I always get a kick out of his pronunciations of names, he's so far off on most of them these days it's hilarious. Just have to shake your head and laugh. It's pretty much the only part of his segment that is entertaining these days.
- LeafGuy89

When Sean Burke was on Spitting Chiclets, he told a story about Don and how he has the names written down with the wrong pronunciation on purpose. He knows it gets people going. Still a showman

No they don't
- RickJames77

Yes they do.

Cap floor is at 60 million as of today.

In 5 years, that could be 70 million.

Even if they spend "20 million" on bullpoop LTIR contracts to get to 70, they're still going to be spending 50 million a year on players.

If one of those players is Matthews, even if it's at 15 million a year, they would spend it on him in a heartbeat.

There's some big problems in Arizona other than a losing product.

Their arena situation is their biggest obstacle. Both the City of Phoenix and the State of Arizona have said they aren't going to pay for a new arena. The Suns don't have any interest in going halvsies. The uncertainty of where they will play (iirc, they are now on a 1-year lease) has to hurt their longterm planning.

And the non-traditional market is also a big hurdle.

Having said that, it sounds like the new owner will be infinitely better than the old one, so there is hope.
- Atomic Wedgie

No doubt they have big problems but if home is home to Matthews and he's a UFA and they give him the same money as everybody else is offering, he's as good as gone, especially if the team is ripe with great top picks on ELCs like the Leafs were when they signed Tavares.

Yes they do.

Cap floor is at 60 million as of today.

In 5 years, that could be 70 million.

Even if they spend "20 million" on bullpoop contracts to get to 70, they're still going to be spending 50 million a year on players.

If one of those players is Matthews, even if it's at 15 million a year, they would spend it on him in a heartbeat.
- JohnFergusonJr

You said they need to spend to the cap floor, I'm saying they don't. Spending is to actually expend currency, not have some bullpoop contract on your books. Teams are starting to get pretty pissed about this too. Especially the ones that pay other teams in revenue sharing, who are employing this very tactic. I'd do the same though.

You said they need to spend to the cap floor, I'm saying they don't. Spending is to actually expend currency, not have some bullpoop contract on your books. Teams are starting to get pretty pissed about this too. Especially the ones that pay other teams in revenue sharing, who are employing this very tactic. I'd do the same though.
- RickJames77

I just explained to you exactly how they'd still have to spend 50-60 million even if the cap floor is 70. I don't know how else to explain it to you. At the end of the day, they still have to spend some kind of real money on players. And if one of those players is Matthews, they'll spend it.

You said they need to spend to the cap floor, I'm saying they don't. Spending is to actually expend currency, not have some bullpoop contract on your books. Teams are starting to get pretty pissed about this too. Especially the ones that pay other teams in revenue sharing, who are employing this very tactic. I'd do the same though.
- RickJames77

I've never bought the line that other teams are pissed about teams like the Coyotes buying dead contracts.

If it means one less competitive team, isn't that a good thing?

I've never bought the line that other teams are pissed about teams like the Coyotes buying dead contracts.

If it means one less competitive team, isn't that a good thing?
- Atomic Wedgie

Plus a dumping ground for old broken players.

I just explained to you exactly how they'd still have to spend 50-60 million even if the cap floor is 70. I don't know how else to explain it to you. At the end of the day, they still have to spend some kind of real money on players. And if one of those players is Matthews, they'll spend it.
- JohnFergusonJr

Oh ok so when you said this "But at the end of the day, the Coyotes always have to spend at least 50-60 million to get to the cap floor." I was supposed to automatically assume those figures were in a world where the cap floor grew by nearly 20%. Gotcha

I've never bought the line that other teams are pissed about teams like the Coyotes buying dead contracts.

If it means one less competitive team, isn't that a good thing?
- Atomic Wedgie

One less competitive team AND a place to dump a competitive team's mistakes.

One less competitive team AND a place to dump a competitive team's mistakes.
- JohnFergusonJr

Late, get outta here.

Oh ok so when you said this "But at the end of the day, the Coyotes always have to spend at least 50-60 million to get to the cap floor." I was supposed to automatically assume those figures were in a world where the cap floor grew by nearly 20%. Gotcha
- RickJames77

Yeah because the discussion is centered around "Matthews as a UFA in 5 years".

And in 5 years, the cap floor could easily be 70 million as it stands today.

All of this is really semantics. If a player of Matthews' caliber is available and considering Arizona, they'll find the money for him. Go on CapFriendly right now and look at the players they're paying real dollars to today. Paying Matthews wouldn't be a problem for them if he's their only real big expenditure in 5 years time.

I've never bought the line that other teams are pissed about teams like the Coyotes buying dead contracts.

If it means one less competitive team, isn't that a good thing?
- Atomic Wedgie

It's a fair point. I'd imagine money drives some of these guys more than success (of course playoff success can in turn drive the other, but I don't pretend to know whether having one less competitive team moves the needle for the teams paying others.)

Good article that breaks it down but basically says that players with a US residence will really have no difference in pay than if they played in the US. ~~If the bulk of their getting max signing bonus. Which Toronto can do just fine.

"Based on the tax treaty between Canada and the United States, Canada can only tax signing bonuses at a maximum rate of 15%. Therefore, to the extent any income is subject to a maximum of 15% tax in Canada, a player will receive a full credit against their U.S. taxes for this income thus placing them in no worse off position by playing in Canada."

https://www.crowe.com/ca/...tm_campaign=View-Original
- lonnyBohonos

(frank)ING FINALLY!

I've been telling you guys this forever.

Taxes for wealthy people are not the same as blue collar workers. See Bezos. See Mitt Romney. See Donald Drumpf.

The amount of money you lose in taxes after extreme amounts of rights off and strategic financial planning is next to nothing. You work your taxes as low as you can say 10% with the high level of write off entitlements. Then your investment portfolio for that amount of money conservatively will accrue 5-7% gains. That's a loss of 3-5% in taxes.

(That is a very simplified summary with simple round numbers but the point is in there...and yes there are a lot of other things buried in the process but when you're paying the best accountants and tax lawyers, it works.)

A kid making $10m/yr for 5 years invested properly can afford 3 to 4 generations of family....unless you're Kusniffsov or have Jack Johnson's parents.

Steamwhistle sucks.