You're right.

On top of that the player just says, "You're paying me 11 sheets to eat popcorn? lol ok"

It's not like other GMs aren't going to pay him come free agency because he was benched.

- Aaron_85

And worse comes to worse he’d just take a one year deal to prove he’s still highly skilled and grab an 8 year after that while still in his 20s lol

And worse comes to worse he’d just take a one year deal to prove he’s still highly skilled and grab an 8 year after that while still in his 20s lol
- Dozzer

Yeah like 1 year at 10 million still. He ain't going to be taking like a 5 million prove it self contract.

They won’t be placing an $11 million dollar guy in the press box.

What is happening is nothing new for a league with a hard cap, and sitting him only means the leafs are only giving themselves $77mill in an $88mill cap. The leafs gave him the deal, and only a loser turns their back on the deal that they signed.
- Dozzer

True… getting players would be even harder if you treat players and their rights like that.

Yeah like 1 year at 10 million still. He ain't going to be taking like a 5 million prove it self contract.
- Aaron_85

He will if nobody offers him anything more lol

All things aside benching him would hurt the leafs the most. Say goodbye to being able to convince UFAs to sign there because none of them will trust the management from honouring the deals. Also the current stars will want out. And current RFAs will bail as soon as they can as well.

Speaking of current stars wanting out let’s hope JT beats CRA over this taxation fight. If not living in the US at July 1st bonus time disappears. Meaning someone like Matthews, who only gets league minimum cause he gets the rest as off-season bonuses, will likely sign elsewhere once his contract is up.

True… getting players would be even harder if you treat players and their rights like that.
- .HOHO.

Yup! Getting them is even being nice lol, keeping the ones they got will become harder as well.

He will if nobody offers him anything more lol

All things aside benching him would hurt the leafs the most. Say goodbye to being able to convince UFAs to sign there because none of them will trust the management from honouring the deals. Also the current stars will want out. And current RFAs will bail as soon as they can as well.

Speaking of current stars wanting out let’s hope JT beats CRA over this taxation fight. If not living in the US at July 1st bonus time disappears. Meaning someone like Matthews, who only gets league minimum cause he gets the rest as off-season bonuses, will likely sign elsewhere once his contract is up.
- Dozzer

NHL needs to fix the cap to reflect after tax dollars. Somehow!
It’s ridiculous that the Leafs fund lesser teams AND get fücked because of taxes.

NHL needs to fix the cap to reflect after tax dollars. Somehow!
It’s ridiculous that the Leafs fund lesser teams AND get fücked because of taxes.
- .HOHO.

cap needs be on net income per area err something like that.
I read a pro league has that somewhere.

NHL needs to fix the cap to reflect after tax dollars. Somehow!
It’s ridiculous that the Leafs fund lesser teams AND get fücked because of taxes.
- .HOHO.

I can’t blame taxation tbh. The rangers for instance are closer to the leafs then a lot of teams (only about 3% less) and they still got to the semifinals.

Dubas (frank)ed up and overpaid too many star forwards with soft games. Made the D weak, the goaltending, and the bottom six. It’s why the leafs haven’t been doing much. The hope this year is that a different coach will change that… we’ll see

cap needs be on net income per area err something like that.
I read a pro league has that somewhere.
- dmnted

The league itself doesn’t need or want success in Canada when they’re trying to build the sport’s popularity in the US. Things won’t be changing anytime soon.

He will if nobody offers him anything more lol

All things aside benching him would hurt the leafs the most. Say goodbye to being able to convince UFAs to sign there because none of them will trust the management from honouring the deals. Also the current stars will want out. And current RFAs will bail as soon as they can as well.

Speaking of current stars wanting out let’s hope JT beats CRA over this taxation fight. If not living in the US at July 1st bonus time disappears. Meaning someone like Matthews, who only gets league minimum cause he gets the rest as off-season bonuses, will likely sign elsewhere once his contract is up.
- Dozzer

Just to be clear, the off season signing bonus originally was implemented as a way to get around a lock out since there's no lock out during the off season, so players would still receive that money whereas during the season they would lose it.

It has/had less to do with taxes. I honestly don't think players worry too much about the taxes especially while really young and not having a family and such.

The league itself doesn’t need or want success in Canada when they’re trying to build the sport’s popularity in the US. Things won’t be changing anytime soon.
- Dozzer

Well they certainly do want and need it considering many of the Canadian teams are supporting the dog poop US teams

Best TV theme ever.

Just to be clear, the off season signing bonus originally was implemented as a way to get around a lock out since there's no lock out during the off season, so players would still receive that money whereas during the season they would lose it.

It has/had less to do with taxes. I honestly don't think players worry too much about the taxes especially while really young and not having a family and such.
- Aaron_85

Oh yes it does.

Matthews this contract for instance gets $49,650,000 on July 1st and makes nothing more than league minimum throughout the seasons.

So $49,650,000 at Arizona’s taxation allows him to bring home $30,038,250 whereas if he made it all during the seasons up in Toronto he’s only getting $23,072,355. So even if he doesn’t notice his agent and accountant sure as hell do.

Oilers trying to lose fans with poopty hires..Hiring Bowman is a terrible look.

Oh yes it does.

Matthews this contract for instance gets $49,650,000 on July 1st and makes nothing more than league minimum throughout the seasons.

So $49,650,000 at Arizona’s taxation allows him to bring home $30,038,250 whereas if he made it all during the seasons up in Toronto he’s only getting $23,072,355. So even if he doesn’t notice his agent and accountant sure as hell do.
- Dozzer

Yet he still signed in Toronto instead of going south as some predicted. I bet $5 he resigns in Toronto again.

Friendly bet Bruce! We both know we'll sadly be here in 5 years anyway

Oilers trying to lose fans with poopty hires..Hiring Bowman is a terrible look.
- Azuredoom

And Kane... And Perry... Cess pool organization.

cap needs be on net income per area err something like that.
I read a pro league has that somewhere.
- dmnted

Apparently a European basketball league works that way.

Well they certainly do want and need it considering many of the Canadian teams are supporting the dog poop US teams
- Aaron_85

In Canada.

Only 40% of Canadians like hockey, so a whole 15.5 million people.

The states are roughly the same (Altho only 13% are known to be avid and not casual fans) and that works out to be about 133.3 million people. That’s 8.5x more than in Canada.

Canadians need to grasp that when it comes to the hockey business they mean very little to the league.

In Canada.

Only 40% of Canadians like hockey, so a whole 15.5 million people.

The states are roughly the same (Altho only 13% are known to be avid and not casual fans) and that works out to be about 133.3 million people. That’s 8.5x more than in Canada.

Canadians need to grasp that when it comes to the hockey business they mean very little to the league.
- Dozzer

43 mil? NM re-read

Oilers trying to lose fans with poopty hires..Hiring Bowman is a terrible look.
- Azuredoom

on top of that, is he actually a good GM?

he gets the cup win credit (like chiarelli) but most of the moves and players were in place when they took over.

not sure its worth the backlash its going to get. for an meh GM

I can’t blame taxation tbh. The rangers for instance are closer to the leafs then a lot of teams (only about 3% less) and they still got to the semifinals.

Dubas (frank)ed up and overpaid too many star forwards with soft games. Made the D weak, the goaltending, and the bottom six. It’s why the leafs haven’t been doing much. The hope this year is that a different coach will change that… we’ll see
- Dozzer

According to yesterday’s article in the Athletic, the Rangers are the highest taxed team for players - almost 2% higher than Toronto and Ottawa.

The league itself doesn’t need or want success in Canada when they’re trying to build the sport’s popularity in the US. Things won’t be changing anytime soon.
- Dozzer

I don't have the statistics behind this, so it's more speculation than anything else - but right now there is seemingly a significant amount of revenue growth in hockey - large media deals, arena revenue and so on - but compared to its peers among the large scale sports? I'm not sure what an expected growth level would be - as an example, in 2005, the NBA had about $3.37b in revenue; the NHL had around $2.2b.

Year over year saw growth of about $402m in the NBA, but only $211m in the NHL. Now that is still a staggering amount of growth - although the largest influences in that growth margin among both sports is the partnerships with gambling and increased media deals.

At what point, if you're looking at the finances of the NHL, do you start to think that ignoring the inequities faced by the larger markets (New York, LA, Toronto, Montreal) will start to haunt them? I agree that it's not Canada they care about - but if it starts to affect the revenue streams generated out of the New York or LA markets, where taxation is also quite high, they might start to look at it.

MLB has leaned into its most profitable markets (something I hate, personally) and it has paid off for them. Granted it does this via the luxury tax system which generally is exploited by the markets with the most revenue to be gained through expenditure. It's a different form of inequitable playing field than the tax system.

I don't have the statistics behind this, so it's more speculation than anything else - but right now there is seemingly a significant amount of revenue growth in hockey - large media deals, arena revenue and so on - but compared to its peers among the large scale sports? I'm not sure what an expected growth level would be - as an example, in 2005, the NBA had about $3.37b in revenue; the NHL had around $2.2b.

Year over year saw growth of about $402m in the NBA, but only $211m in the NHL. Now that is still a staggering amount of growth - although the largest influences in that growth margin among both sports is the partnerships with gambling and increased media deals.

At what point, if you're looking at the finances of the NHL, do you start to think that ignoring the inequities faced by the larger markets (New York, LA, Toronto, Montreal) will start to haunt them? I agree that it's not Canada they care about - but if it starts to affect the revenue streams generated out of the New York or LA markets, where taxation is also quite high, they might start to look at it.

MLB has leaned into its most profitable markets (something I hate, personally) and it has paid off for them. Granted it does this via the luxury tax system which generally is exploited by the markets with the most revenue to be gained through expenditure. It's a different form of inequitable playing field than the tax system.
- Monkeypunk

There is a very, very strong argument that MLB benefits from large market teams performing slightly better than small market teams.

You may hate the Yankees, but that hate just means you’ll watch them play.

The opposite of love is not hate - it’s indifference.

In Canada.

Only 40% of Canadians like hockey, so a whole 15.5 million people.

The states are roughly the same (Altho only 13% are known to be avid and not casual fans) and that works out to be about 133.3 million people. That’s 8.5x more than in Canada.

Canadians need to grasp that when it comes to the hockey business they mean very little to the league.
- Dozzer

It's not really an aggregate statistic. Similar to how Winnipeg has a a strong and dedicated following, they are very small in number - the US has many cities which fall into that category. The bulk of their numbers still fall into the Original 6 cities - Detroit, Boston, New York and Chicago. LA has been a huge revenue generator since Gretzky came along. I think Vegas generates a notable amount of revenue - and some relatively die-hard markets like Philly and Pittsburgh, Dallas and probably Washington.

Because I was curious, I just looked up the revenue stats on Forbes - there are more US fans, but proportionately both countries have a relatively similar number of franchises that could be doing better (Canada has 2 in Ottawa & Winnipeg and the US has 6 in Columbus, Arizona (Utah should do better), San Jose, Anaheim, Buffalo and Florida - they won the cup and had less revenue than Winnipeg).

Your point isn't lost, though - there are like 24 million people in the greater NY area alone.

In Canada.

Only 40% of Canadians like hockey, so a whole 15.5 million people.

The states are roughly the same (Altho only 13% are known to be avid and not casual fans) and that works out to be about 133.3 million people. That’s 8.5x more than in Canada.

Canadians need to grasp that when it comes to the hockey business they mean very little to the league.
- Dozzer

Except for fans of the 2 Original 6 teams that are Canadian teams that financially prop up the dog poop US teams like Arizona and in the past both Florida teams etc. etc etc.

There is no way the NHL just says "m'eh don't like it we don't GAS to Toronto or Montreal" & by proxy the fans of those teams.