An idea to remove the cap advantage for no tax states

[Golden_Jet]

I know this sounds radical and borderline going into Politics territory, but all taxes should be abolished.

All of them.

Our funds have been misused far too much for far too long. Literally theft at this point.

Ok
Who’s paying to build a road
Who’s paying to bring water to your house
Who’s paying the school teachers, police, fire
Etc, etc

 

[JPT]

Ok
Who’s paying to build a road
Who’s paying to bring water to your house
Who’s paying the school teachers, police, fire
Etc, etc

Why, the private sector! That good ol' private sector. Soon the poors won't be allowed anywhere in public just like the founders intended.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

It is true that a post tax income can't be known exactly ahead of time. Circumstances will change year to year.

But you can use an estimate of post tax income at the time of signing that will on average get it right.

I think we've got a case of lawyer-brain here where the inexactness is used as an excuse to do nothing. I have economist-brain and I think a good estimate coming from a consistent formula would solve almost the entire problem, so we should just do that.

Major - overall - if the impact was determined to be significant enough, and there was consistency in treatment across the league, I would agree with you. I think that you have a fair point, and a reasonable perspective, but will try to lay out why "an estimate approach" is more difficult than you would think.

I'll give you an example of why there can't be "consistency of treatment" with the current CBA structure. Consider these 2 issues (just what came to mind - not necessarily a complete, holistic list):
1) This is really only an issue for UFA eligible contracts where a team has to compete with another team with a different tax implications based on their location. So the "tax equalization" would only be on UFA contracts, and not the organization's entire salary cap.
2) The impact of signing bonus $'s are VERY significant on the calculation. Do you assume that every UFA contract is going to be paid out with max bonuses? (And for those who don't know, the Canada version of the IRS is challenging the treatment of Tavares' signing bonus which has HUGE potential impacts for the players). Previously I was critical of the study which was referenced based on playing all the home games in FLA, but essentially that is a similar affect when a player in a tax free state is paid almost entirely in Signing bonus.

Here is an example of why this is so complex:
If you calculated a weighted average tax rate based on where a player plays 82 games (which is what you're proposing above) - it's completely inaccurate and actually misleading if the player is paid via signing bonus. Look at the Toronto Maple Leafs with 2 similar players in Marner and Matthews. Marner, who I assume is an Ontario resident, get's charged ONT provincial taxes on his entire signing bonus. This has negative tax ramifications because he essentially doesn't "get credit" for playing games in either tax free states, or lower tax jurisductions (like OH/PA which I think are around 3-5% vs. 11% for Ontario). If you look at Matthews though - because he's a resident of AZ his signing bonus is tax-free from a state tax perspective. So two player who play for the same team, and both get paid very similarly $'s via signing bonus, have HUGELY different tax implications.

 

[Laus723]

Ok
Who’s paying to build a road
Who’s paying to bring water to your house
Who’s paying the school teachers, police, fire
Etc, etc

I spent a few years as construction consultant. Basically, I worked for the banks. Bob the builder applied for a loan to build a shopping center. Let’s say it’s $50,000,000. Pretty sizable center. Bob sends his plans, pics, etc to the bank, the bank contacts us and asks…can this be done for $50M. We look at all the factors including other centers recently built, the area, cost of supplies…we say yes or no and make recommendations.

Fast forward to the approval, the banks don’t say, “you’re approved, here’s $50M. Good luck.” The builder gets draws. A few months in they submit the first draw, the land has been cleared, the foundation poured, they ask for that money AFTER the work has been done. I go out, say yes it’s all done, or say, the foundation is ready to be poured, but it hasn’t been poured yet, I’m cutting the draw. It protects the banks.

All that to say, the government has none of the above. None. “We need new roads!” Some road company says that’ll be $75M, the government says ok. They don’t have someone check to see if it can be done for half. They say they do, but I’ve seen their approvals. Woof.

Anyway, taxation to a degree is theft, but we do need roads, municipalities, etc…but with MUCH better checks and balances.

Why, the private sector! That good ol' private sector. Soon the poors won't be allowed anywhere in public just like the founders intended.

This is false.

 

[JPT]

I spent a few years as construction consultant. Basically, I worked for the banks. Bob the builder applied for a loan to build a shopping center. Let’s say it’s $50,000. Pretty sizable center. Bob sends his plans, pics, etc to the bank, the bank contacts us and asks…can this be done for $50M. We look at all the factors including other centers recently built, the area, cost of supplies…we say yes or no and make recommendations.

Fast forward to the approval, the banks don’t say, “you’re approved, here’s $50M. Good luck.” The builder gets draws. A few months in they submit the first draw, the land has been cleared, the foundation poured, they ask for that money AFTER the work has been done. I go out, say yes it’s all done, or say, the foundation is ready to be poured, but it hasn’t been poured yet, I’m cutting the draw. It protects the banks.

All that to say, the government has none of the above. None. “We need new roads!” Some how says that’ll be $75M, the government says ok. They don’t have someone check to see if it can be done for half. They say they do, but I’ve seen their approvals. Woof.

Anyway, taxation to a degree is theft, but we do need roads, municipalities, etc…but with MUCH better checks and balances.


This is false.

It was obviously not serious.

 

[Laus723]

It was obviously not serious.

Hard to tell these days. Especially on the webs.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

Hard to tell these days. Especially on the webs.

Especially this thread! Talk about woof! ;o)

 

[Laus723]

You can take all the money in America, I’ll even add in Canada, and separate it out evenly amongst the adults. Within 5-10 years the majority of those that have now, will have again and the majority of those that don’t, will be wondering where it went and complaining they got cheated.

There’s a reason so many pro athletes are broke after earning tens of millions. It’s education, how to spend it, what to spend it on how to save it, how to invest, etc.

I owned a pool company for awhile. Had 3 pools on “billionaires row” on Palm Beach, huge houses right on the beach. None of them drove a car over $100,000. They had lexuses or Jeep Cherokees. A 4th guy would get a new super car every few months and just kept rolling one into the other. That was his guilty pleasure, but his huge house was paid off. (He’d always give financial advice).

In the NHL, it’s about spending correctly. Not handing out bloated contracts if possible, letting guys walk who “deserve” the raise, but that money is probably best spent elsewhere.

The Panthers were a disaster due to terrible ownership and stupidity in the GM position. They’re successful because Zito has spent wisely, let guys go, have others a shot, and cut ties when the chance on a guy didn’t work out. Yes, taxes play a part, wisdom plays the greatest role.

 

[Lacaar]

You can take all the money in America, I’ll even add in Canada, and separate it out evenly amongst the adults. Within 5-10 years the majority of those that have now, will have again and the majority of those that don’t, will be wondering where it went and complaining they got cheated.

There’s a reason so many pro athletes are broke after earning tens of millions. It’s education, how to spend it, what to spend it on how to save it, how to invest, etc.

I owned a pool company for awhile. Had 3 pools on “billionaires row” on Palm Beach, huge houses right on the beach. None of them drove a car over $100,000. They had lexuses or Jeep Cherokees. A 4th guy would get a new super car every few months and just kept rolling one into the other. That was his guilty pleasure, but his huge house was paid off. (He’d always give financial advice).

In the NHL, it’s about spending correctly. Not handing out bloated contracts if possible, letting guys walk who “deserve” the raise, but that money is probably best spent elsewhere.

The Panthers were a disaster due to terrible ownership and stupidity in the GM position. They’re successful because Zito has spent wisely, let guys go, have others a shot, and cut ties when the chance on a guy didn’t work out. Yes, taxes play a part, wisdom plays the greatest role.

I think pinning the Panthers success on some kind of brilliant management and that solely is incorrect. Zito has even come out saying he knows he has it A LOT easier than other managers due to nature of his teams location and tax situation. He sells it hard and hell I don't blame him.

Boiling NHL team success down to just the people that run it is a load of shit. Some teams have significant advantages that make managing them easier. Can they still f*** it up.. certainly. There's some markets where good managers can't dig out. Calgary is a great example. They were forced into moves they didn't want to make. Seemed to make the best of it. I liked their moves.. media liked their moves. Result was shit. Nobody wants to play there. Meanwhile Florida gets a guy who practically forced his way there. And you want to chalk this up to some Brilliance on Zito? sorry I'm not buying what you're selling... because I think it's a load of shit.

It's like your example. Give 2 guys.. tribes the same money. Put one by a river and ton of resources. Put the other in a desert with nothing. Next thing you know one is wealthy and the other is poor. Yes people make bad decisions. but to think this happens in a bubble without environmental and social impacts is a load of f***ing shit.

Florida, Nashville, Tampa, Dallas, Vegas, and Seattle have it easier then most other NHL teams. Take 6 other random teams and compare their success over time. Heck I imagine you'd have a hard time taken 6 other teams of your choosing and matching the success. Hell they've won 4 of the last 5 cups.

In the last 5 years
Dallas - Missed once.
Florida - Hasn't missed.
Tampa Bay - Hasn't missed.
Vegas - Missed once.
Nashville - Missed once.
Seattle - Missed twice, only made it once. Will be interesting to see.

So out of 28 chances to make the playoffs. The Tax exempt teams missed 5 times.

My guess is you'd be hard pressed to find 6 other teams that hit the playoffs with that ratio in the last 5 years. Let alone taking a random 6.

It's just a really hard coincidence to sell to me that they just happen to have better managers than the other teams. I believe they just get a lot more opportunity then any other teams. Making their managers look better.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

You can take all the money in America, I’ll even add in Canada, and separate it out evenly amongst the adults. Within 5-10 years the majority of those that have now, will have again and the majority of those that don’t, will be wondering where it went and complaining they got cheated.

There’s a reason so many pro athletes are broke after earning tens of millions. It’s education, how to spend it, what to spend it on how to save it, how to invest, etc.

I owned a pool company for awhile. Had 3 pools on “billionaires row” on Palm Beach, huge houses right on the beach. None of them drove a car over $100,000. They had lexuses or Jeep Cherokees. A 4th guy would get a new super car every few months and just kept rolling one into the other. That was his guilty pleasure, but his huge house was paid off. (He’d always give financial advice).

In the NHL, it’s about spending correctly. Not handing out bloated contracts if possible, letting guys walk who “deserve” the raise, but that money is probably best spent elsewhere.

The Panthers were a disaster due to terrible ownership and stupidity in the GM position. They’re successful because Zito has spent wisely, let guys go, have others a shot, and cut ties when the chance on a guy didn’t work out. Yes, taxes play a part, wisdom plays the greatest role.

Agree with this and well said.

I do say though that I understand the "counterpoint" of some people who use Yzerman's time in TB as example. He was seen as a "rock star" GM when he was in Tampa, but has been pretty hit or miss on his time in DET when no longer operating in the tax-free environment. My rebuttal to that position is that the state-tax is but one of a ton of factors including ownership and related infrastructure, scouting (amateur & pro), existing talent in the organization, etc. To distill it down to just the taxability is a gross oversimplification.

To me, FLA has been historic "best in class" in reclamation projects and buying low on guys that other teams were giving up on. That's a direct reflection on their pro-scouting, and shows Zito's acumen more than anything else. The fact that he can also let guys walk when needed (Montour, OEL) just reinforces that case, He would do that because he's confident in his ability to replace those guys eventually. "My" team's GM at the time absolutely imploded the Hawks when giving a terrible contract to Brent Seabrook that slammed the competitive window closed. (You can make a case it was closed before that, but IMO it was the final nail in the coffin.)

 

[Derailed75]

Look. If teams are run properly they can over come any advantage gained by quality of life and taxes. Just check out the Leafs. They have to deal with high taxes, the dollar difference, and cold weather. Now they are in a destination city but have more factors against them than for. And if their front office had half a clue how to manage the cap and build a team they would be year in year out contenders.
However they choose to spend half their cap on forwards and act like defense and goal tending are after thoughts so they are first round fodder.

 

[Laus723]

I think pinning the Panthers success on some kind of brilliant management and that solely is incorrect. Zito has even come out saying he knows he has it A LOT easier than other managers due to nature of his teams location and tax situation. He sells it hard and hell I don't blame him.

Boiling NHL team success down to just the people that run it is a load of shit. Some teams have significant advantages that make managing them easier. Can they still f*** it up.. certainly. There's some markets where good managers can't dig out. Calgary is a great example. They were forced into moves they didn't want to make. Seemed to make the best of it. I liked their moves.. media liked their moves. Result was shit. Nobody wants to play there. Meanwhile Florida gets a guy who practically forced his way there. And you want to chalk this up to some Brilliance on Zito? sorry I'm not buying what you're selling... because I think it's a load of shit.

It's like your example. Give 2 guys.. tribes the same money. Put one by a river and ton of resources. Put the other in a desert with nothing. Next thing you know one is wealthy and the other is poor. Yes people make bad decisions. but to think this happens in a bubble without environmental and social impacts is a load of f***ing shit.

Florida, Nashville, Tampa, Dallas, Vegas, and Seattle have it easier then most other NHL teams. Take 6 other random teams and compare their success over time. Heck I imagine you'd have a hard time taken 6 other teams of your choosing and matching the success. Hell they've won 4 of the last 5 cups.

In the last 5 years
Dallas - Missed once.
Florida - Hasn't missed.
Tampa Bay - Hasn't missed.
Vegas - Missed once.
Nashville - Missed once.
Seattle - Missed twice, only made it once. Will be interesting to see.

So out of 28 chances to make the playoffs. The Tax exempt teams missed 5 times.

My guess is you'd be hard pressed to find 6 other teams that hit the playoffs with that ratio in the last 5 years. Let alone taking a random 6.

It's just a really hard coincidence to sell to me that they just happen to have better managers than the other teams. I believe they just get a lot more opportunity than any other teams. Making their managers look better.

Explain the years prior. Where has Zito said he has it easier? He may have, but Tallon never found it. Keenan, no previous manager. Prior to Stevie Y Tampa went over a decade without another Cup.

You went on to answer your own question. It’s takes great ownership and management. Period.

 

[Golden_Jet]

So out of 28 chances to make the playoffs. The Tax exempt teams missed 5 times.

My guess is you'd be hard pressed to find 6 other teams that hit the playoffs with that ratio in the last 5 years. Let alone taking a random 6.

In playoffs

Oilers
Carolina
Colorado
Toronto
Boston
Pittsburgh (missed once)

With some others missing once as well, but stopped at 6.

Not to mention last 5 years is cherry picked, now do since the cap came in affect.

 

[Laus723]

Agree with this and well said.

I do say though that I understand the "counterpoint" of some people who use Yzerman's time in TB as example. He was seen as a "rock star" GM when he was in Tampa, but has been pretty hit or miss on his time in DET when no longer operating in the tax-free environment. My rebuttal to that position is that the state-tax is but one of a ton of factors including ownership and related infrastructure, scouting (amateur & pro), existing talent in the organization, etc. To distill it down to just the taxability is a gross oversimplification.

To me, FLA has been historic "best in class" in reclamation projects and buying low on guys that other teams were giving up on. That's a direct reflection on their pro-scouting, and shows Zito's acumen more than anything else. The fact that he can also let guys walk when needed (Montour, OEL) just reinforces that case, He would do that because he's confident in his ability to replace those guys eventually. "My" team's GM at the time absolutely imploded the Hawks when giving a terrible contract to Brent Seabrook that slammed the competitive window closed. (You can make a case it was closed before that, but IMO it was the final nail in the coffin.)

The scouts in Tampa and Detroit are also a factor and comparing Stevie in both locations isn’t a good comparison. They found Kucherov in what round?? Detroit isn’t doing that. To say “taxes” when he’s overpaid Chiarot and others is ridiculous.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

The cap would be based off the post tax amount and that amount wouldn't change between teams. Every team would have the same cap. Players get the same after tax income wherever they go, that's good for them.

Lets say a player today in a high tax market (50% tax rate) makes $10m pre-tax. His team pays $5m+$5m for taxes. His new permanent cap hit would be $5m. If gets traded to a 0% state his cap hit is still $5m, his new team just pays $5m + 0% taxes. In a 40% tax state he gets $5m + $3.3m tax.

It's a simple system. Lower tax state get cheaper teams though because they have less tax to pay. Overall every team gets the same value of players for the cap hit. Fine tuning a player's tax return is the players job.


Do I think it's worth doing? Nope. But it isn't hard.

I can't believe this is a real post from an adult....

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

I think pinning the Panthers success on some kind of brilliant management and that solely is incorrect. Zito has even come out saying he knows he has it A LOT easier than other managers due to nature of his teams location and tax situation. He sells it hard and hell I don't blame him.

Boiling NHL team success down to just the people that run it is a load of shit. Some teams have significant advantages that make managing them easier. Can they still f*** it up.. certainly. There's some markets where good managers can't dig out. Calgary is a great example. They were forced into moves they didn't want to make. Seemed to make the best of it. I liked their moves.. media liked their moves. Result was shit. Nobody wants to play there. Meanwhile Florida gets a guy who practically forced his way there. And you want to chalk this up to some Brilliance on Zito? sorry I'm not buying what you're selling... because I think it's a load of shit.

It's like your example. Give 2 guys.. tribes the same money. Put one by a river and ton of resources. Put the other in a desert with nothing. Next thing you know one is wealthy and the other is poor. Yes people make bad decisions. but to think this happens in a bubble without environmental and social impacts is a load of f***ing shit.

Florida, Nashville, Tampa, Dallas, Vegas, and Seattle have it easier then most other NHL teams. Take 6 other random teams and compare their success over time. Heck I imagine you'd have a hard time taken 6 other teams of your choosing and matching the success. Hell they've won 4 of the last 5 cups.

In the last 5 years
Dallas - Missed once.
Florida - Hasn't missed.
Tampa Bay - Hasn't missed.
Vegas - Missed once.
Nashville - Missed once.
Seattle - Missed twice, only made it once. Will be interesting to see.

So out of 28 chances to make the playoffs. The Tax exempt teams missed 5 times.

My guess is you'd be hard pressed to find 6 other teams that hit the playoffs with that ratio in the last 5 years. Let alone taking a random 6.

It's just a really hard coincidence to sell to me that they just happen to have better managers than the other teams. I believe they just get a lot more opportunity then any other teams. Making their managers look better.

I'll play Devil's advocate. Tax certainly helps, but the tax free states are only a little better of than someplace like OH/PA with a 3-4% state income tax rate. Why have the Flyers and Jackets going to be down again this year? IMO - that is due to the life-cycles of those teams, and drafting/developing/decisions made by those team and not necessarily having a tax benefit. Likewise - TB/FLA struggled for relevance and it wasn't until they drafted/developed/traded for talent that they turned it around. And from NASH's perspective, which UFA's were they able to get that made them successful over the last 5 years? They are an organziation that historically wasn't a "premier" location and people were shocked when Duchene signed there.

Look at the Stars. Are they successful because they were able to lock up Benn/Seguin at such a bargain price? Or were they successful because they were able to draft guys like Hintz, Robertson, Oettinger, Johnson, Harley & Stankhoven outside of the top 10 in the draft?

The tax situation is certainly an advantage. But so is the weather, and the ability of a player to live a relatively normal life with a less obtrusive media/fan presence. To distill it down to tax is overly simplicstic.

And I would say that Calgary has created a lot of their own problems. Shouldn't Bennett have been part of their core? Wouldn't it have been smart to maybe see Huberdeau play some games before committing 8 years and $84M to him? How does their pipeline of talent look coming up (and I like Zary a lot)?

I'll end this with - which NHL team is most likely to land a premier UFA? History would suggest the Rangers, and they operate in one of the highest tax environments in the NHL. They were able to land Panarin even thought CLM was offering more money. Every team has certain benefits or negatives - but the CBA can't be expected to factor all of those into account to create pure competitive balance.

 

[catnip]

Since everyone and their pet ferret make the playoffs these days, I set the bar a bit higher and only looked at who made the final four. Other than Tampa, who have been more consistently successful, the rest of the no-tax brigade have really only achieved shit within the last five years. The difference is quite notable even to years 6-10, let alone 11-20.

I'm not saying it didn't take the teams 15 years to figure out how to optimise their tax and cap management, but there are probably other factors at play too. Useful draft picks come to mind.

 

[DistantThunderRep]

The cap is based on the players actual earnings.

So let’s say a Canuck is making 3 million.

After taxes he’s actually only making 1.5.

Than his cap his 1.5 million.

Easy peazy

Didn't think I would need to use this so quickly.

 

[Lacaar]

Explain the years prior. Where has Zito said he has it easier? He may have, but Tallon never found it. Keenan, no previous manager. Prior to Stevie Y Tampa went over a decade without another Cup.

You went on to answer your own question. It’s takes great ownership and management. Period.

I'll play Devil's advocate. Tax certainly helps, but the tax free states are only a little better of than someplace like OH/PA with a 3-4% state income tax rate. Why have the Flyers and Jackets going to be down again this year? IMO - that is due to the life-cycles of those teams, and drafting/developing/decisions made by those team and not necessarily having a tax benefit. Likewise - TB/FLA struggled for relevance and it wasn't until they drafted/developed/traded for talent that they turned it around. And from NASH's perspective, which UFA's were they able to get that made them successful over the last 5 years? They are an organziation that historically wasn't a "premier" location and people were shocked when Duchene signed there.

Look at the Stars. Are they successful because they were able to lock up Benn/Seguin at such a bargain price? Or were they successful because they were able to draft guys like Hintz, Robertson, Oettinger, Johnson, Harley & Stankhoven outside of the top 10 in the draft?

The tax situation is certainly an advantage. But so is the weather, and the ability of a player to live a relatively normal life with a less obtrusive media/fan presence. To distill it down to tax is overly simplicstic.

And I would say that Calgary has created a lot of their own problems. Shouldn't Bennett have been part of their core? Wouldn't it have been smart to maybe see Huberdeau play some games before committing 8 years and $84M to him? How does their pipeline of talent look coming up (and I like Zary a lot)?

I'll end this with - which NHL team is most likely to land a premier UFA? History would suggest the Rangers, and they operate in one of the highest tax environments in the NHL. They were able to land Panarin even thought CLM was offering more money. Every team has certain benefits or negatives - but the CBA can't be expected to factor all of those into account to create pure competitive balance.

I think boiling it down to 1 thing is impossible. Are those 6 teams successful because they're tax free. No. Does tax free help them be successful. YES. That fact people in here think it's no advantage or not significant is bull f***ing shit imo. Just accept it is all. The great Bill Zito even admits it and says he uses it. He sells the fact they're tax free.. and he sells the fact they're in Miami and drive golf carts to practice. Hell I want to go play for them haha. Saying that has no impact on the teams success is bull shit is all I'm saying. This is a guy who came from Columbus as an assistant GM. Now he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. A guy who admitted exactly what many here saying doesn't exist.

You're trying to explain singular reasons for each team when the reasons involve a ton of factors.
No doubt there are destination cities in the NHL like you point out. Rangers being one of them. All 6 tax free teams are too. Heck there's probably a reason those states are tax free. Because they're destination cities for weather, population etc.

Has Dallas drafted great.. hell yah. Does Dallas lose FA's left right and center.. nope.

Has Calgary made mistakes.. yes. Why does Bennet succeed in Florida but not Calgary? Why does Hubredeau succeed in Florida and fail in Calgary. I don't think that's an easy question to answer and nobody probably knows the reasons. But the cost of a mistake in Calgary is much much harder to recover from than a mistake made by Florida. Florida has access to pretty much every Free agent in any form. UFA, RFA, etc. Calgary has access to what? 70% at best because of NTC and NMC?

Even myself being an Oiler fan I'm not Naive to think our signings are because the Oilers are some great organization. Hardly. People are signing here for two reasons. McDavid and Draisitl. Edmonton is a destination because of lottery balls. When they age out there will be an exodus and a second decade of darkness. We'll have to draft better than the other teams in hopes of getting out it again.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

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

Lol .

 

[Laus723]

I think boiling it down to 1 thing is impossible. Are those 6 teams successful because they're tax free. No. Does tax free help them be successful. YES. That fact people in here think it's no advantage or not significant is bull f***ing shit imo. Just accept it is all. The great Bill Zito even admits it and says he uses it. He sells the fact they're tax free.. and he sells the fact they're in Miami and drive golf carts to practice. Hell I want to go play for them haha. Saying that has no impact on the teams success is bull shit is all I'm saying. This is a guy who came from Columbus as an assistant GM. Now he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. A guy who admitted exactly what many here saying doesn't exist.

You're trying to explain singular reasons for each team when the reasons involve a ton of factors.
No doubt there are destination cities in the NHL like you point out. Rangers being one of them. All 6 tax free teams are too. Heck there's probably a reason those states are tax free. Because they're destination cities for weather, population etc.

Has Dallas drafted great.. hell yah. Does Dallas lose FA's left right and center.. nope.

Has Calgary made mistakes.. yes. Why does Bennet succeed in Florida but not Calgary? Why does Hubredeau succeed in Florida and fail in Calgary. I don't think that's an easy question to answer and nobody probably knows the reasons. But the cost of a mistake in Calgary is much much harder to recover from than a mistake made by Florida. Florida has access to pretty much every Free agent in any form. UFA, RFA, etc. Calgary has access to what? 70% at best because of NTC and NMC?

Even myself being an Oiler fan I'm not Naive to think our signings are because the Oilers are some great organization. Hardly. People are signing here for two reasons. McDavid and Draisitl. Edmonton is a destination because of lottery balls. When they age out there will be an exodus and a second decade of darkness. We'll have to draft better than the other teams in hopes of getting out it again.

TLDR past “Zito sells the fact that they’re in Miami.” They aren't, the practice facility is on Foet lauderdale, the arena is in Sunrise. Both north of Miami. Also asked you to provide where he’s carried on about tax free.

Actually, I’m sure he does. Part of his job is to be a salesman, I e actually said it’s an advantage, but what allllll the whiners can’t do is show me and others where it’s “worked” until the last few years. Both here and Tampa. What’s gone on in those years, amazing ownership AND management.

On more time since it’s hard, Zito chose not to overpay Monty to stay. He let him walk and used that money in other places. Previous GMs would’ve given him the same as he got in Seattle or more.

It’s disingenuous to cry about taxes when one GM is playing chess (didn’t sign a single FA to a bloated contract on July 1st) and others are playing checkers.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Allow teams to reimburse based on their states tax rates so that their players can make equivalent take home pay as a zero tax state. NHL just needs to hire an accountant to provide some guidelines.

Who will have a problem with it? Players? Nope. Teams? Nope, they have the option to do it but they dont have to.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

The cap is based on the players actual earnings.

So let’s say a Canuck is making 3 million.

After taxes he’s actually only making 1.5.

Than his cap his 1.5 million.

Easy peazy

Wow what a unique idea!

This thread is really exposing the IQ deficit on these forums.

 

[Lacaar]

In playoffs

Oilers
Carolina
Colorado
Toronto
Boston
Pittsburgh (missed once)

With some others missing once as well, but stopped at 6.

Not to mention last 5 years is cherry picked, now do since the cap came in affect.

Oilers missed in 2019-2020 In the qualify round.. DID not make the playoffs.
Toronto same as Edmonton.
Pittsburgh missed the last 2 years and lost in the qualify round in 2019-2020.

That's 5 misses. Pretty close to the percentage of the tax free teams though.

I said you'd be hard pressed. You made it sound easy but you also messed it up.

Surprisingly if you substitute the Islanders for Pittsburgh it gets pretty decent. Only 3 misses in the last 5 years.

The intention of my point was that if Tax Free didn't factor into team success we should likely see some similar successes between 6 random teams over a period. was 5 years the best number for this, no. Perhaps if we go back to the cap we see it isn't.. or that it wasn't and has become an advantage over time?

I do think there's no denying it.. the last 5 years. Tax free teams are CRUSHING it. For whatever reasons.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

A lot of companies allow salary adjustments based on location of their employee in various offices. Why not allow this for NHL players. Just make that portion of the salary cap free.