An actual breakdown on taxes per team

[cowboy82nd]

Sure whatever you say....


And who gets these endorsements more so being in a heavier taxed city exactly? Besides maybe Mcdavid and Mathews and few select players in the NHL. You argument is plain low IQ. Fact remains teams that pay higher tax should be calculated in the salary cap and factored in. No reason for anyone to argue this point.

So, people getting paid more for endorsement deals should calculate into the salary cap. If we are talking money, let’s talk about ALL the money.

 

[Menzinger]

So, then we should rule in endorsement deals too. It’s the fair thing to do.

Endorsements aren't connected to a contract though unlike taxes. They're separate work by the player

 

[Tanknation]

So, people getting paid more for endorsement deals should calculate into the salary cap. If we are talking money, let’s talk about ALL the money.

Clearly that's more of a personal thing between players and companies where taxes apply to the team and affect the team as a whole. So once again, your argument makes no sense. Even if we factor in endorsements, ok??? Like few select players in the NHL get them.

Realistically though, this endorsement talk has nothing to do with the team and players contract where taxes do. So stop making silly arguments for the sake of making dumb arguments.

 

[DuklaNation]

The key term that the nhl used during that apocalyptic lockout was cost certainty.

It was achieved via salary cap and escrow.

Is that what they told everyone? This structure is about supporting low revenue teams.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Is that what they told everyone? This structure is about supporting low revenue teams.

They said cost certainty
Look at MLSE they love it, making money hand over fist now.

 

[DuklaNation]

They said cost certainty
Look at MLSE they love it, making money hand over fist now.

Cost ceiling for low revenue teams helps their profit viability. You can paint it however you want, this system is about propping up those markets.

 

[VoidCreature]

It’s a competitive sport, the playing field should be made as even as possible. The best solution remains to apply the salary cap to post-tax income. Adjust the figure accordingly to match revenue.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Cost ceiling for low revenue teams helps their profit viability. You can paint it however you want, this system is about propping up those markets.

No it’s about cost certainty for the league and teams.
Leafs love the cap, but you can paint it however you want.

 

[Legion34]

The hard cap has never been about an even playing field. The OWNERS pushed for a hard cap for cost certainty paired with revenues.

Nope. Still wrong. How many years and times? It’s silly

Ultimately the owners were the only show in town. They all could have agreed to pay players X max and that’s it. They had cost certainty for NA players. You really think they couldn’t find 700 players to play for whatever they agreed to? They locked players out for a whole year. They all came back.

Regardless. The equal caps do not provide certainty. The HRR linkage does.
There is nothing to say that each team has to have the same cap. Just like not all 23 players have to equally split the 87 million. Not all 32 teams have to split the pie evenly.

That is parity. The way that the cap is made equal by design is forced parity.

Bettman openly said this was a goal of how the cap was implemented

Again, if it’s most people, there should be at least one person here that has moved solely due to the income tax rate. Let’s see ‘em.



We are tax friendly towards businesses, but that’s outside the scope of this conversation. People aren’t corporations.

No, if I made $1.5m, I’m not sweating $90k. I wouldn't even move for it now, and I’m quite a bit below $1.5m. If someone forced me to move, I wouldn’t go somewhere my family didn’t want to be in order to extract those last few dollars from my contract. Marc Methot himself described the tax situation as a “silver lining.” And I think that’s exactly what it is. Cherry on top but not the reason anybody is picking a location. Part of the benefit of being rich is having the money to live where you want.

Except again.

1.) NHL players ARE doijt this. Dadanov literally made NTC his list based on taxes

2.) they are taking less cap with the same take home to circumvent the cap and allow a better team

This has led to an over representation of tax free states winning.

What you think you would do doesn’t matter. What they are doing does

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

I wonder if cost of living gobbles up a lot of this tax benefit. Not cheap to live in Florida between housing and insurance.

A lot of those teams with the highest tax rates are in Canada and our cost of living is inanely high as well.

 

[Legion34]

They said cost certainty
Look at MLSE they love it, making money hand over fist now.

They also said parity.

Again. You can easily give different teams different cap ceilings and floors and still have certainty.

5+5 and 9+1 both = 10

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Sure whatever you say....


And who gets these endorsements more so being in a heavier taxed city exactly? Besides maybe Mcdavid and Mathews and few select players in the NHL. You argument is plain low IQ. Fact remains teams that pay higher tax should be calculated in the salary cap and factored in. No reason for anyone to argue this point.

Mikeheyev got a million dollar sponsorship playing Toronto's third line from Campbell's soup because of a nickname.

 

[Golden_Jet]

They also said parity.

Again. You can easily give different teams different cap ceilings and floors and still have certainty.

5+5 and 9+1 both = 10

Yes, Gary did said parity can be a result of teams having cap certainty.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Nope. Still wrong. How many years and times? It’s silly

Ultimately the owners were the only show in town. They all could have agreed to pay players X max and that’s it. They had cost certainty for NA players. You really think they couldn’t find 700 players to play for whatever they agreed to? They locked players out for a whole year. They all came back.

Regardless. The equal caps do not provide certainty. The HRR linkage does.
There is nothing to say that each team has to have the same cap. Just like not all 23 players have to equally split the 87 million. Not all 32 teams have to split the pie evenly.

That is parity. The way that the cap is made equal by design is forced parity.

Bettman openly said this was a goal of how the cap was implemented





Except again.

1.) NHL players ARE doijt this. Dadanov literally made NTC his list based on taxes

2.) they are taking less cap with the same take home to circumvent the cap and allow a better team

This has led to an over representation of tax free states winning.

What you think you would do doesn’t matter. What they are doing does

How many years can you still be so dense? You think the owners locked out players because of anything else but cost certainity? Its literally how the cap works. Revenues -> Profit -> Profit Share -> Player Salary. Its not rocket science, Players salaries bloated where it was higher than the owners split of the profits. Its why after the lockouts the Revenue share with Owners vs Players gradually rose to 50% and now it won't move from 50% instead of starting at the over 50% that it was before the lockouts. Its why the cap moves up by small percentages due to revenue the league generates.

The owners simply wanted to reign in bloating salaries because the players were getting more than half of the revenues generated by the NHL. Holy shit, its been years and you still don't understand the basic fact.

A lot of those teams with the highest tax rates are in Canada and our cost of living is inanely high as well.

Bitch to your local governments and the feds then? The cap's primary goal isn't for fairness or parity, its primary goal is to guarantee salaries don't bloat at exponential rates like they did before the lockouts.

 

[Legion34]

How many years can you still be so dense? You think the owners locked out players because of anything else but cost certainity? Its literally how the cap works. Revenues -> Profit -> Profit Share -> Player Salary. Its not rocket science, Players salaries bloated where it was higher than the owners split of the profits. Its why after the lockouts the Revenue share with Owners vs Players gradually rose to 50% and now it won't move from 50% instead of starting at the over 50% that it was before the lockouts. Its why the cap moves up by small percentages due to revenue the league generates.

The owners simply wanted to reign in bloating salaries because the players were getting more than half of the revenues generated by the NHL. Holy shit, its been years and you still don't understand the basic fact.


Bitch to your local governments and the feds then? The cap's primary goal isn't for fairness or parity, its primary goal is to guarantee salaries don't bloat at exponential rates like they did before the lockouts.

Again. There is NOTHING that says equal cap among teams is required for cost certainty. All that is required is that 32 teams of 23 get paid 50% of the revenue.

That does not have to be split equally

9+1
8+2
7+3
6+4
5+5

Are all certain to equal 10. Only 1 is parity.

Which betman said was a key goal.

 

[Golden_Jet]

How many years can you still be so dense? You think the owners locked out players because of anything else but cost certainity? Its literally how the cap works. Revenues -> Profit -> Profit Share -> Player Salary. Its not rocket science, Players salaries bloated where it was higher than the owners split of the profits. Its why after the lockouts the Revenue share with Owners vs Players gradually rose to 50% and now it won't move from 50% instead of starting at the over 50% that it was before the lockouts. Its why the cap moves up by small percentages due to revenue the league generates.

The owners simply wanted to reign in bloating salaries because the players were getting more than half of the revenues generated by the NHL. Holy shit, its been years and you still don't understand the basic fact.


Bitch to your local governments and the feds then? The cap's primary goal isn't for fairness or parity, its primary goal is to guarantee salaries don't bloat at exponential rates like they did before the lockouts.

Ya wasn’t it around 70% players before the lockout.

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

Bitch to your local governments and the feds then? The cap's primary goal isn't for fairness or parity, its primary goal is to guarantee salaries don't bloat at exponential rates like they did before the lockouts.

Well, I wasn't actually bitching at anyone, I was just sharing info. But if you want to see me bitch at our governments in Canada...how much time do you have?

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Again. There is NOTHING that says equal cap among teams is required for cost certainty. All that is required is that 32 teams of 23 get paid 50% of the revenue.

That does not have to be split equally

9+1
8+2
7+3
6+4
5+5

Are all certain to equal 10. Only 1 is parity.

Which betman said was a key goal.

What in gods name are you doing here? I am going to lay it out in the dumbest way I can.

The league made $1B in Profit. The Players total Salary was eating lets say 60% of the profit.

Owners Profit: $400M
Players: $600M

Owners were like this is dumb, we make less money than our employees. Lock out happens.

Now after years, the HRR is 50%. The league determines how much total each team can spend up to so the Owners keep 50% of the profits. This is the primary goal. The secondary goal for the Floor is to keep the league competitive, so no one just hires a bunch of plugs and pays them pennies. This also means more Players get good wages. Because there is these numbers, there can be a by product of pairity. But it was NOT the primary or even secondary goal of the Salary Cap from the owners point of view and why the owners locked out the Players.

Ya wasn’t it around 70% players before the lockout.

I remember around 65% but you may be right.

Well, I wasn't actually bitching at anyone, I was just sharing info. But if you want to see me bitch at our governments in Canada...how much time do you have?

I do it about 3 times a day, I live in Vancouver so I have some extra bitching to do.

 

[Golden_Jet]

What in gods name are you doing here? I am going to lay it out in the dumbest way I can.

The league made $1B in Profit. The Players total Salary was eating lets say 60% of the profit.

Owners Profit: $400M
Players: $600M

Owners were like this is dumb, we make less money than our employees. Lock out happens.

Now after years, the HRR is 50%. The league determines how much total each team can spend up to so the Owners keep 50% of the profits. This is the primary goal. The secondary goal for the Floor is to keep the league competitive, so no one just hires a bunch of plugs and pays them pennies. This also means more Players get good wages. Because there is these numbers, there can be a by product of pairity. But it was NOT the primary or even secondary goal of the Salary Cap from the owners point of view and why the owners locked out the Players.


I remember around 65% but you may be right.


I do it about 3 times a day, I live in Vancouver so I have some extra bitching to do.

Also the cap is not at the 50/50 split number, which the one poster doesn’t understand. It’s the midpoint.

The maximum cap is 115% of the calculation of a 50/50 split. The minimum is 85%.

For that poster, it’s obviously about, why can’t my team spend more than the 115%.

 

[Legion34]

What in gods name are you doing here? I am going to lay it out in the dumbest way I can.

The league made $1B in Profit. The Players total Salary was eating lets say 60% of the profit.

Owners Profit: $400M
Players: $600M

Owners were like this is dumb, we make less money than our employees. Lock out happens.

Now after years, the HRR is 50%. The league determines how much total each team can spend up to so the Owners keep 50% of the profits. This is the primary goal. The secondary goal for the Floor is to keep the league competitive, so no one just hires a bunch of plugs and pays them pennies. This also means more Players get good wages. Because there is these numbers, there can be a by product of pairity. But it was NOT the primary or even secondary goal of the Salary Cap from the owners point of view and why the owners locked out the Players.


I remember around 65% but you may be right.


I do it about 3 times a day, I live in Vancouver so I have some extra bitching to do.

Bettman clearly said it created parity. Multiple times. He brags about it.
It was featured in every press conference.

 

[JianYang]

Is that what they told everyone? This structure is about supporting low revenue teams.

That is certainly a byproduct. You wouldn't have 30 plus teams without it. But now we are veering away from the topic at hand.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Bettman clearly said it created parity. Multiple times. He brags about it.
It was featured in every press conference.

He said it was a result / by-product of cost certainty, not that the cap created parity.

 

[tucker3434]

Nope. Still wrong. How many years and times? It’s silly

Ultimately the owners were the only show in town. They all could have agreed to pay players X max and that’s it. They had cost certainty for NA players. You really think they couldn’t find 700 players to play for whatever they agreed to? They locked players out for a whole year. They all came back.

Regardless. The equal caps do not provide certainty. The HRR linkage does.
There is nothing to say that each team has to have the same cap. Just like not all 23 players have to equally split the 87 million. Not all 32 teams have to split the pie evenly.

That is parity. The way that the cap is made equal by design is forced parity.

Bettman openly said this was a goal of how the cap was implemented





Except again.

1.) NHL players ARE doijt this. Dadanov literally made NTC his list based on taxes

2.) they are taking less cap with the same take home to circumvent the cap and allow a better team

This has led to an over representation of tax free states winning.

What you think you would do doesn’t matter. What they are doing does

Didn’t Dadonov sign that UFA deal with the senators, one of the highest taxed teams in the league?

“Circumvent” lol. Most of them are taking less money to stay the place they’ve called home for 7 years, which has never been all that uncommon.

LA won a couple cups being one of the highest taxed markets in the league. Get better management and quit making excuses.

 

[Tanknation]

Mikeheyev got a million dollar sponsorship playing Toronto's third line from Campbell's soup because of a nickname.

Ok cool. And what does that have to do with a teams salary cap structure and salaries that can be spent exactly? It still does not make it fair for teams to be even on salary cap spenditures. This applies to any high taxed city and no matter what team you are on, It should be a fair system across the board. Not sure what the point of throwing out these useless takes are other than just throwing shit on a wall.

Taxes and contracts are separate business from endorsements that are done on players own time and side businesses.

 

[CupsOverCash]

Didn’t Dadonov sign that UFA deal with the senators, one of the highest taxed teams in the league?

“Circumvent” lol. Most of them are taking less money to stay the place they’ve called home for 7 years, which has never been all that uncommon.

LA won a couple cups being one of the highest taxed markets in the league. Get better management and quit making excuses.

Been a excuse for years. Entitlement because it's hockey mecca. People listen to the media and believe their own hype too much. Could be said about so many things.