NHL Ownership Grades (The Athletic)

[ponder719]

Flyers should be wayyyy lower.

This. Comcast is functionally an absentee landlord, at a time when we need active, engaged leadership looking for talent in the front office.

 

[Peasy]

Leafs should be a D or an F.

But the fans just default to them having "good" ownership because they spend to the cap every year and in other areas. But meanwhile they are extremely risk adverse and would rather keep status quo than making a bold move. A recipe for failure.

Leafs just need to look at the Jays for whats to come in the future now that Rogers own the majority stake hold.

 

[Ratsreign]

"No State Income tax" has a hell of a lot to do with it, let's not kid ourselves.

Good players always had FL on their no-go lists. Most good players they drafted were happy to get out of FL the first chance they had to go to a real organization (some just wouldn’t come to begin with).
No one ever cried about FL having a great tax advantage back then
Nowadays, according to some, it’s the biggest factor in why they are good.

 

[Steddy33]

Pegula is a good NFL owner and a horrible NHL owner

Why because he got lucky with a generational quarterback? Amazing how much masking winning can do

 

[VinikToWinIt]

"No State Income tax" has a hell of a lot to do with it, let's not kid ourselves.

Right, yes.

That's why all the big NBA stars are lining up to play for the Orlando Magic, and the Jacksonville Jaguars have a dynastic grip on the NFL. Not to mention the ever-dominant Miami Marlins, a stalwart force of the MLB.

 

[Arthur Morgan]

Toronto should get an F.

Richest team in the league and in the last 20 years has won 1 playoff round.

they beat TB couple years ago in the 1st,

being one of the richest teams means nothing in a hard cap league though.

I dunno what an owner has to do with anything anyways. shouldn't they be graded on the work the GM's have done? I would assume Toronto would be an A or A+ since they are allowed to spend to the max of the cap year after year,

if a team isn't allowed to spend up to the max then shouldn't they get a lower rating? isnt that really all an owner can do anyways? I dont have a sub to athletic so I cant read what this is based off

 

[Mattilaus]

Believe it or not when Jeff Vinik bought the Lightning in 2010, Tampa already had warm weather and also had no state income tax. The team was crap, the previous ownership was a total embarrassment, the team was going broke, fan support was slipping. New ownership that cared about building a first rate organization was what changed everything.

Having an advantage means nothing if the person in charge doesn't know how to utilize it. Vinik was able to fix the lightning specifically because of its advantages.

Think of it like a race. One car has a really good driver and the car tops out at 150mph. The other car has a really bad driver but can go 200mph. Sure the car that can go 150 mph might win due to having a good driver, but that doesn't mean its a fair contest. The lightning just hired a better driver to go along with their faster car.

 

[Hennessy]

I think if James Dolan was as involved with the Rangers as he is with the Knicks, then he'd be closer to an F. Giving him a C+ is generous as far as I'm concerned. I am just thankful he generally lets the hockey people do their thing for the Rangers and focuses his meddling on the Knicks.

Also, how quickly everyone forgets just how bloody awful Florida and Tampa were for most of their existence. Two prime examples of how the right ownership makes a huge difference!

Tampa has been great for most of their existence. Maybe not their early years, but who is? They won a Cup pretty quick and have rarely been bad in the 20 years since.

 

[Rcknrollkillnmachine]

B- for the Kraken seems generous for being mediocre to bad outside of one play-off run.

 

[voyageur]

This. Comcast is functionally an absentee landlord, at a time when we need active, engaged leadership looking for talent in the front office.

The Flyers without Ed Snider do seem lifeless.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Tampa has been great for most of their existence. Maybe not their early years, but who is? They won a Cup pretty quick and have rarely been bad in the 20 years since.

They’ve been around for 32 years.

In first 20 they had that Cup run. Other than that, they missed the playoffs 14 times and won a combined 4 playoff rounds. Yeah the Cup is sweet but that’s also a LOT of losing which comprises most of their existence. Nobody was talking about Tampa as a free agent destination before 2020.

 

[njdevil26]

I would like to know how they determine each category. I saw a more specific ranking list that had the Devils owners as middle of the road when it comes to "willingness to spend"

They spent right up to the cap and bought our Keefe's contract from Toronto and extended it. They aren't being cheap anywhere.

 

[Mad Dog Tannen]

And just like that the website is not in Jets heritage blue and red.

Did the Jets owners put hfboards up to this?

If so maybe they just earned their B!!

 

[Ezpz]

I like how it's just if you won a cup or you're a contending team it's automatic A, unless you're Canadian. Like two years ago you'd probably put Boston A+.

Then there's the Jets, consistently in the mix for almost their entire existence while constantly having to navigate players wanting to leave. Had Buff literally just walk out and retire without a heads up. Their owner is among the richest in the league and spends when necessary and doesn't intervene in the GM's decisions, has kept a very consistent front office and let them execute their vision. I'm not sure any team in the league could ask for a better ownership group.

The exact same Habs owner probably deserved an F a few years ago for not intervening when it was obvious Bergevin was intending to leave and let him cripple the franchise in his final summer just because of a finals run which didn't change the fact that he was leaving the Habs. He let Danault walk to the team he later signed with and yet no collusion accusations. He used up ever inch of cap space, forcing Hughes to trade a Lehkonen we couldn't afford to extend and dump Toffoli. Only to not disclose Carey Price was essentially done and Hughes didn't need to rush. But because he finally pulled the trigger on firing Bergevin he's now a B+.

I feel like this is more of a GM ranking than an ownership ranking with the lone exception of Utah getting a mega boost for their new owner not making them play in a college arena and the Sens for their F- owner literally dying.

 

[HBK27]

What is the methodology?

Here's what the article says on methodology:

 

[Sun God Nika]

I think we all knew who was going to be last and it wasn’t close. I would have put Francesco Tortellini in a tie for last personally.

View attachment 994295

Its nice being a sens fan going from F- to B+ , hell I would give Andlauer an A

 

[Ace]

Right, yes.

That's why all the big NBA stars are lining up to play for the Orlando Magic, and the Jacksonville Jaguars have a dynastic grip on the NFL. Not to mention the ever-dominant Miami Marlins, a stalwart force of the MLB.

I guess there’s no reason not to change the way the cap is calculated then, right?

Teams that have higher taxes all want it. And boy…teams with low ones sure can’t wait to tell you that it doesn’t matter.

Should be an easy universal fix.

Good to know you’re on the side of change

 

[HBK27]

I would like to know how they determine each category. I saw a more specific ranking list that had the Devils owners as middle of the road when it comes to "willingness to spend"

They spent right up to the cap and bought our Keefe's contract from Toronto and extended it. They aren't being cheap anywhere.

It's all based on fan perception versus other fanbases and potentially a limited sample size, considering that The Athletic long ago took away a beat reporter for the Devils and many other teams - really limiting team-specific content.

There are plenty of teams in the league that are willing to spend right up to the cap, so being ranked 12th I don't think is really a knock against the Devils. Also wonder if "willingness to spend" may also include stuff like arena improvements.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Teams that have higher taxes all want it. And boy…teams with low ones sure can’t wait to tell you that it doesn’t matter.

I think the ones "with low ones" will tell you that it's complicated - not that it doesn't matter. For instance, the state of Washington doesn't have an income tax but has one of the highest sales taxes in the country. They receive their revenue in a different way.

 

[voyageur]

They’ve been around for 32 years.

In first 20 they had that Cup run. Other than that, they missed the playoffs 14 times and won a combined 4 playoff rounds. Yeah the Cup is sweet but that’s also a LOT of losing which comprises most of their existence. Nobody was talking about Tampa as a free agent destination before 2020.

I think a lot has changed in 20 years. Before the lockout, teams with the biggest bankrolls, owners willing to pay the most to win, had many of the best players. Detroit, Dallas, Colorado, St. Louis, N.Y. Rangers, New Jersey, Toronto Etc. Russians affinity for Florida, starting with Bure, put them on the map. In a way that the rat pack didn't. Tampa was built on Lecavalier, and Brad Richards. But still needed Khabibulin to get over the hump.

I'm not sure when taxes became an issue in the NHL. It definitely wasn't before. Canadian players often dreamed of playing for their home town team. Now it's the opposite. I think you can play under the radar, with no one knowing who you are, or what you do, in many southern markets, with a tax advantage that I don't think was a consideration 20 years ago.

Winning definitely helps the allure of any market. Except Winnipeg.

 

[Tie Domi Esquire]

Writers from The Athletic and their readership.

 

[Jeremy2020]

How did the sabres manage to get that high of a grade?

 

[Garbageyuk]

Why are you surprised Carolina is a B+? Canes have been competitive since Dundon took over and has put the right people in charge ensuring that Carolina is successful.

Kotkaniemi and Rantanen fiascos, and they haven’t won shit or even been close. Dundon is a clown.

 

[justHypnos]

I think a lot has changed in 20 years. Before the lockout, teams with the biggest bankrolls, owners willing to pay the most to win, had many of the best players. Detroit, Dallas, Colorado, St. Louis, N.Y. Rangers, New Jersey, Toronto Etc. Russians affinity for Florida, starting with Bure, put them on the map. In a way that the rat pack didn't. Tampa was built on Lecavalier, and Brad Richards. But still needed Khabibulin to get over the hump.

I'm not sure when taxes became an issue in the NHL. It definitely wasn't before. Canadian players often dreamed of playing for their home town team. Now it's the opposite. I think you can play under the radar, with no one knowing who you are, or what you do, in many southern markets, with a tax advantage that I don't think was a consideration 20 years ago.

Winning definitely helps the allure of any market. Except Winnipeg.

Because taxes in and of themselves are not a problem. Taxes when combined with a salary cap are a problem. That’s why it wasn’t a consideration when the salary cap didn’t exist.

 

[voyageur]

Because taxes in and of themselves are not a problem. Taxes when combined with a salary cap are a problem. That’s why it wasn’t a consideration when the salary cap didn’t exist.

It's still a recent phenomenon. The first days of the Cap saw small market teams get an advantage because they could pick up good Cap dumps. Like Carolina and Edmonton did. But it didn't stop the allure of markets like Detroit, Boston, New York, Chicago, Philly, Pitt, L.A, Anaheim from picking up good players, because they were contending teams.

Tampa was pretty bad for a long time. Florida was at the risk of moving until Viola and company took over.

It's a very recent phenomenon that taxes have played a part in player movement. I think it's business savvy, maybe agent influenced.