An idea to remove the cap advantage for no tax states

[TheNumber4]

That’s quite the reach to think it takes a decade, to figure out that in some states, a player will pay less tax for half the season.

Those no tax teams weren’t as competitive back then.
So let’s eliminate the data the doesn’t suit your needs, just because.

Im just using the halfway point of the salary cap era to denote early infancy salary cap era vs. Mature, well understood salary cap era.

And It does take time for a league to transition from an entirely no cap league to a hard cap league. How much time can be anywhere from 5-10 years for team builds to finally mature and for these no tax benefits to take effect. The list of top 4 teams success supports my theory. The next 10 years wil confirm it further.

 

[x Tame Impala]

I’m not handwaiving away anything. I provided reasoning as to why looking at the early years of the salary cap era makes less sense than looking at the later years. Early vs late was cut off at the half way poiint, so it’s not 15 years.

Players agents and teams hadn’t fully figured out how to optimize caps and contracts in this entirely new world and landscape back in 2005 and onward. Contracts signed and teams built in that era also need time to fully optimize in general. It was never 2020 I was talking about.

You know what’s a weak rebuttal? No even understanding the argument being made then just calling it weak without providing any relevant reasoning.

That's exactly what you're doing. What's your basis of evidence for this bolded statement? We're talking about players, agents, GMs, and owners negotiating contracts for tens of millions of dollars. How would they be ignorant to discrepancies of income taxes from 2006 to whatever cut off date you're choosing?

The half way point would be 2015. From 2015 until 2024 that's 10 seasons and in that time frame we've seen "no tax" teams 16 out of a possible 40 times in the final four. 40%. So even under your specified timeline it's still not the majority of the time. EVEN STILL, in that same time frame we've seen 16 teams from high tax and/or Canadian markets in the final four. It's the exact same amount. Why wouldn't that prove how irrelevant the actual effects of this are?

 

[HaNotsri]

Are you telling me that hockey players aren't just filing with a 1040ez?


It's your belief that anyone is going to complete just openly share their finicials?

I live in a country where all that data is public domain. I realize it's more complicated in north america with the differebt states and laws.

The calculation should be ultra simple in Sweden (but the salary cap illegal since it goes against the free market).

 

[JPT]

Seems like teams adapted to the salary cap pretty quickly considering the average team salary in 2005-2006 was over $4.5mil under the cap ceiling.

 

[triggrman]

That's exactly what you're doing. What's your basis of evidence for this bolded statement? We're talking about players, agents, GMs, and owners negotiating contracts for tens of millions of dollars. How would they be ignorant to discrepancies of income taxes from 2006 to whatever cut off date you're choosing?

The half way point would be 2015. From 2015 until 2024 that's 10 seasons and in that time frame we've seen "no tax" teams 16 out of a possible 40 times in the final four. 40%. So even under your specified timeline it's still not the majority of the time. EVEN STILL, in that same time frame we've seen 16 teams from high tax and/or Canadian markets in the final four. It's the exact same amount. Why wouldn't that prove how irrelevant the actual effects of this are?

Nashville made the finals as the 16th seed and guess how many top free agents were on that team?

Here, I can help. Tell me in what way was this a cap advantage?

 

[TheNumber4]

That's exactly what you're doing. What's your basis of evidence for this bolded statement? We're talking about players, agents, GMs, and owners negotiating contracts for tens of millions of dollars. How would they be ignorant to discrepancies of income taxes from 2006 to whatever cut off date you're choosing?

The half way point would be 2015. From 2015 until 2024 that's 10 seasons and in that time frame we've seen "no tax" teams 16 out of a possible 40 times in the final four. 40%. So even under your specified timeline it's still not the majority of the time. EVEN STILL, in that same time frame we've seen 16 teams from high tax and/or Canadian markets in the final four. It's the exact same amount. Why wouldn't that prove how irrelevant the actual effects of this are?

No it’s not.

It takes time for the effect of the salary cap era and therefore affects no tax advantages contracts to take effect. And there’s many reasons for this outside of GM, agents understanding of it. Which yes takes time. For example the first time an expansion draft happened was handled a whole lot differently than the second time an expansion draft happened by NHL teams. Then just use common sense, how many contracts can a team sign for their active impactful roster every year? 1-3 contracts at most? There will be a time lag until a team is built fully optimizing the No tax advantage they have. It’ll also take time for agents and GMs to figure out how to use that no tax advantage optimally. They may not have even talked about that in Negotiations in contracts done early in the cap era.

Yes the last 10 shows that no tax teams are having way more success than other teams. I never said the appearances in the final 4 had to be a majority for this effect to show, only 6/32, so only 20% of teams in the league can even habe that advantage and look how prominently they are featured in final 4.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

I’m not handwaiving away anything. I provided reasoning as to why looking at the early years of the salary cap era makes less sense than looking at the later years. Early vs late was cut off at the half way poiint, so it’s not 15 years.

Players agents and teams hadn’t fully figured out how to optimize caps and contracts in this entirely new world and landscape back in 2005 and onward. Contracts signed and teams built in that era also need time to fully optimize in general. It was never 2020 I was talking about.

You know what’s a weak rebuttal? No even understanding the argument being made then just calling it weak without providing any relevant reasoning.

This is an impressive level of delusion. It's hard to imagine you're actually sincere in your comments at this point.

It's quite clear that there is no amount of evidence that will convince you to reconsider your position. You might want to reflect on what that means...

 

[JPT]

Could it be that the salary cap has successfully created parity in the league, thus allowing the "no-tax" teams to enjoy some measure of success?

Oh no it's gotta be the tax advantage that took ten years to influence anything.

 

[x Tame Impala]

No it’s not.

It takes time for the effect of the salary cap era and therefore affects no tax advantages contracts to take effect. And there’s many reasons for this outside of GM, agents understanding of it. Which yes takes time. For example the first time an expansion draft happened was handled a whole lot differently than the second time an expansion draft happened by NHL teams. Then just use common sense, how many contracts can a team sign for their active impactful roster every year? 1-3 contracts at most? There will be a time lag until a team is built fully optimizing the No tax advantage they have. It’ll also take time for agents and GMs to figure out how to use that no tax advantage optimally. They may not have even talked about that in Negotiations in contracts done early in the cap era.

Yes the last 10 shows that no tax teams are having way more success than other teams. I never said the appearances in the final 4 had to be a majority for this effect to show, only 6/32, so only 20% of teams in the league can even habe that advantage and look how prominently they are featured in final 4.

How can no tax teams have the same % of representation in the Final Four teams the last 10 seasons as high-tax teams? It's the exact same amount. The league has parity, teams ebb and flow from being elite to being in the gutter.

 

[Chainshot]

Build a winning team. Then most don’t give a damn if they are playing for a contender.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Just pass laws at the state/provincial level that says athletes are exempt from state income taxes.

Give millionaires a tax break because they play a sport well and we want it to be “fair”?


Big brain idea

 

[DistantThunderRep]

Could it be that the salary cap has successfully created parity in the league, thus allowing the "no-tax" teams to enjoy some measure of success?

Oh no it's gotta be the tax advantage that took ten years to influence anything.

Parity was never the primary goal of the Salary Cap. When the Owners locked out the Players, NHL player wages made up 75% of all league revenue. Not profits, but league revenue. People like Number4 and Legion are all about bringing back that kind of wild spending because it was healthier for the league when 80% of the teams were almost insolvent.

Bobby Holik would still, to this day be one of the highest paid players in the NHL...in 2003-2004. That year he was paid $9.6M that year....Bring back those days...they were the best.

Give millionaires a tax break because they play a sport well and we want it to be “fair”?


Big brain idea

Thats the joke, I think you missed the sarcasm.

 

[tarheelhockey]

It’s amazing to think about the differences it would have made on the internet if Vancouver and Edmonton won one more game apiece.

 

[norrisnick]

It’s amazing to think about the differences it would have made on the internet if Vancouver and Edmonton won one more game apiece.

The difference on the internet was the only reason I was rooting for Edmonton...

 

[TheNumber4]

How can no tax teams have the same % of representation in the Final Four teams the last 10 seasons as high-tax teams? It's the exact same amount. The league has parity, teams ebb and flow from being elite to being in the gutter.

How we this far deep into this conversation and you still don't understand this point. In the last 10 years, 40 team appearances in the Final Four. 16 of those 40 teams were No Tax Teams. A bit less than half. But No Tax teams don't make up half the League, there are only 6 out of 32 teams that are considered No Tax Teams, essentially about 19% of the League is made up of No Tax Teams and yet they make up about 40% of the successful teams in this League. This stat points to the very OBVIOUS advantage these No Tax Teams have because they can and do sign contracts lower than what their competition can.

 

[Viqsi]

And I’m going to repeat that more recent history is more relevant than past history to see if the effects of No Taxes had an effect on winning. My reasoning for that has been posted, refute my reasoning if you can, and if it’s a good argument you may be able to convince me otherwise. Don’t refute it, and I’m gonna continue taking the word of experts on this subject instead of biased homers on an internet message board

Your logical fallacy is special pleading

You moved the goalposts or made up an exception when your claim was shown to be false.

yourlogicalfallacyis.com

 

[Viqsi]

How we this far deep into this conversation and you still don't understand this point. In the last 10 years, 40 team appearances in the Final Four. 16 of those 40 teams were No Tax Teams. A bit less than half. But No Tax teams don't make up half the League, there are only 6 out of 32 teams that are considered No Tax Teams, essentially about 19% of the League is made up of No Tax Teams and yet they make up about 40% of the successful teams in this League. This stat points to the very OBVIOUS advantage these No Tax Teams have because they can and do sign contracts lower than what their competition can.

Your logical fallacy is false cause

You presumed that a real or perceived relationship between things means that one is the cause of the other.

yourlogicalfallacyis.com

We're going to go through the whole damn list at this rate, hon.

 

[Nothingbutglass]

How we this far deep into this conversation and you still don't understand this point. In the last 10 years, 40 team appearances in the Final Four. 16 of those 40 teams were No Tax Teams. A bit less than half. But No Tax teams don't make up half the League, there are only 6 out of 32 teams that are considered No Tax Teams, essentially about 19% of the League is made up of No Tax Teams and yet they make up about 40% of the successful teams in this League. This stat points to the very OBVIOUS advantage these No Tax Teams have because they can and do sign contracts lower than what their competition can.

Probably best if you start rooting for a No Tax team at this point. Nashville has room on the bus. Could be sneaky good this year, great area, players seem to like it.

 

[Pablo El Perro]

Your logical fallacy is special pleading

You moved the goalposts or made up an exception when your claim was shown to be false.

yourlogicalfallacyis.com

Thanks for all you do.

 

[CascadiaPuck]

This needs a main board sticky thread IMO. Same with discussion about improving the NHL point system.

 

[BondraEra]

This thread doesn’t need a sticky, it needs to be locked. The premise is utter nonsense.

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

I had the idea to have taxes added on seperately so if a player is traded to a high-taxed state that it's added onto the salary as opposed to the same base salary no matter where they go.

 

[AlainVigneaultsGum]

Where was all this outrage when Florida sucked major f***ing ass for like twenty years lmfao

 

[TheNumber4]

Parity was never the primary goal of the Salary Cap. When the Owners locked out the Players, NHL player wages made up 75% of all league revenue. Not profits, but league revenue. People like Number4 and Legion are all about bringing back that kind of wild spending because it was healthier for the league when 80% of the teams were almost insolvent.

Bobby Holik would still, to this day be one of the highest paid players in the NHL...in 2003-2004. That year he was paid $9.6M that year....Bring back those days...they were the best.


Thats the joke, I think you missed the sarcasm.

No. People like Number4 has never advocated against a Salary Cap. I still support the Salary Cap, even though my Oilers would be benefitted largely if we were able to spend our near League leading revenue on better players. I've always advocated for a fair playing ground or competitive balance, which may not have been spoken about as the "primary" goal of the Salary cap, at a time when the League was losing money hand over fist, but was still an intended effect of the Salary Cap.

 

[Gnashville]

Do Canadians not realize that the people in those states still pay federal taxes?

Not only that most of those State Taxes are deductible from the Federal. It’s 39% anywhere in the US for anyone making millions.