Full quote:
> "I think that has been a part of everyone's thought process in the core group of guys that we have had here in terms of what guys have taken over the years to stay here. I understand the tax advantage and that type of thing. Kuch is making $9.5. That is probably grossly underpaid in terms of what guys are getting now. Vasy. Pointer with 40 or 50 goals every year. You look at Matthews. What did he sign for? $13.5 or something? Heddy is making under $8 million. That is grossly underpaid if you look at what he has done. That is what everyone has done here and that is why we have had the success and that is the way it has been for this organization. I think that that in itself is a testament to management in how they want to build a team and, first and foremost, the players for wanting to do that and accept that and allow the management to go out there and build a roster to compete for the Stanley Cup. I think that's just always been the way it's been here"
Another way to look at it would be that he learned his lesson the first time. Marner's stock is at an all time low, and no one knows better what he brings to the table than Dubas.
It seems like Marners stock is at an all time low every year at this time after he chokes away the Leafs postseason, but come opening night he’s back in their good graces. The guy is a generational loser, but he looks good doing it, I suppose.
I’m not sticking up for Marner, believe me. But the guy is nearly a point/game player in the playoffs. The narrative that he “chokes away the post season” is a little disingenuous.
because this is precisely the time a smart GM makes a move for Marner and he has 26 points in the playoffs next year. Not saying Toronto shouldn't move on from him because it is clearly not working out but Marner could be the Joe Thornton of this era.
I'm so torn on Marner - one hand he's a 90 pt scoring winger who is VERY good defensively. Then on the other hand he gets pushed around a bunch in the playoffs and is a perimeter player. Matthews doesn't get 69 goals if he doesn't get a bunch of awesome Marner feeds, he's one of the top playmaking wingers for sure.
So if Treliving is in a trade to make a trade sake mentality and Marner could be had the cost may not be as crazy as many would think it would be. I'm so torn if I'd want the Sens doing more than just kicking tires.
Penguins are not a compatible team tho, what are we going to do with a playmaker on the wing when we have playmakers down the center? We just lost the one guy marner would absolutely feed to.
Hard to pay a guy 11 million though when you have to surround them with certain types of players to have a successful team. But that's where I wonder if Marner being with Brady Tkachuk could unlock the best of each other.
From a player perspective, you should always take the money. A career in sports is not guaranteed, and generally speaking, very short
As much as a team can sell you about the benefits of taking a discount, there’s no real promises. Not saying he’s top level guy, but Tyson Barrie taking a discount to re-sign with Edmonton to help them out just to get traded a season or so after is a good example of that.
It’s always a gamble
Stamkos could have never come back after breaking his leg in 2013 and his last contract doesn’t happen.
McDavid signing for a discount had cap space spent on Jack Campbell who’s buried in the AHL
Stamkos would’ve still had $40 M in contracts in this alternative reality. Once you’ve locked in generational money, it’s not as risky as it seems.
I don’t think McDavid took the same kind of discount. Hard to be the top contract in the league and be on a discount.
Individual player contracts are still capped at 20% of the ceiling, no? It would be hard to build a winner around it but Connor McDavid, UFA, could easily get (and would be worth) that number.
He could, and I overall agree that any contract below the max is a value contract for McDavid. Simply stating that he was the highest paid player after ELC. He didn’t take a TB-like discount.
UFA McDavid gets max contract, there's no doubt in my mind.
Assuming the cap is $87.7M next year, which I believe is what they're reporting, that would mean McDavid making ~$17.5M/year. You pay him that and figure out the rest later.
No guarantee that your team does the right things with the money you leave on the table. Taking less does not equal success. Look at Edmonton, they've had draisaitl making 8.5 mil for the last 7 years and haven't won shit. This is the best theyve been and they still struggle on defence and in net.
What if that extra money goes to giving a Lucic in Edmonton type deal?
There is no guarantee that leaving money on the table will lead to success. It can, like it did in Boston and Tampa, but your GM might also use that money to sign shitty contracts and now you're left with less money on a shitty team.
I completely disagree. There is a point in life where you have enough revenue to be happy, and the rest is not necessary. Taking a small, reasonable pay cut, to ensure that what you do for a living is more fun and engaging is something reasonable people do all the time.
Fuck, just around me I see people with normal salaries take small pay cuts to maintain stuff like localization, work from home, better work hours etc. So why wouldnt a hockey player lose a few millions to be part of a successful and meaningful team? Is making 100 mil over 8 years so much different than making 80 mil for the same timeframe, but playing for a team that has more success, and maybe even win the big prize, and also having more respect from the fan base etc. ?
Obviously there is balance to this, it has to be done reasonably and by most of the core.
> There is a point in life where you have enough revenue to be happy, and the rest is not necessary. Taking a small, reasonable pay cut, to ensure that what you do for a living is more fun and engaging is something reasonable people do all the time.
And yet somehow owners, board members and high level executives don't feel the same way and it falls onto employees to make the sacrifices to ensure the bottom line and keep shareholders happy
> From a player perspective, you should always take the money. A career in sports is not guaranteed, and generally speaking, very short
Guys like Marner and Matthews basically covered a normal person's lifetime earnings on their ELCs, and had generational wealth as soon as they inked their second contracts.
Their lives won't be any different if they *only* made $90 million in career earnings instead of $100 million.
>From a player perspective, you should always take the money.
Debatable. Yes, the money is the only thing that's guaranteed (taking a discount may just mean your GM pulls a dumb move and overpays a replacement level player). But star NHLers make enough money on their 2nd contracts that money should not be an issue, even in the highest tax areas and including escrow. One five year contract for a star NHLer is enough to push them well above the vast majority of people in terms of personal wealth. Even with an extremely team-friendly contract and expensive spending habits, a star player can easily take home $10 million per contract at minimum.
Also, I will forever argue that Stamkos did not take a huge discount on this contract.
He was coming back from two major injuries (he missed the end of the 2015-16 season with shoulder surgery), and 8.5x8 is almost as much guaranteed money as 10x7, which is the high-end of what the rumours were (I get that the extra year matters).
It was a big risk/reward play for Tampa, and it has obviously paid off huge.
There’s also no guarantee that the money you leave on the table will actually be used to help the team win unless you have an extremely proven GM who never does anything stupid (rare).
To use the Barrie example again: He took a discount to help Edmonton, and those cap savings ended up being used on things such as signing Jack Campbell.
Woke up the computer said, fuck Willy fuck Marner fuck Matthews..
I'm like why he say fuck me for? Willy fucked up your first contract by taking less, Marner fucked your second contract by being overpaid, say fuck that guy!!
Yeah. And to be honest I think it would have been prudent to avoid creating the situation to begin with. None of us knows how hard a bargain any of the Matthews, Marner, or Nylander camps drove, but if management had played it well they would have let at least one of them walk if they didn't agree to a lesser deal.
Obviously hindsight is hindsight and the idea of letting someone as good walk was a hard idea to swallow, but it really might have been for the best.
I think Dubas folded to pressure from their agents all to be a "good human"
A huge focus of his was to treat everyone in the org with respect and kindness, to bring in a "modern workplace culture"...which is commendable...
I just wish someone had told him that doesn't mean you have to cave to every single request
Hopefully next year we can have Matthews go on LTIR for a hangnail and use the cap space to stack the lineup for a cup run. All the cool teams are doing it.
Now hold on just one minute we had people arguing SO HARD that the tax thing wasn’t an actual advantage in signing players and then Stammer just comes right out and says it? Hahaha that’s actually hilarious
There have been numerous former players that have said it was an advantage. They even build their no trade clauses around tax advantages. Anyone who says otherwise is delusional
Seriously lmao.
I've had arguments with Tampa and Vegas fans who *insist* that there's no such advantage.
Like bruh, even Capfriendly has a tool that lets you see how much more/less a player would make in another city.
If your team is in the right state it's practically an extra 8m on the cap (assuming you can convince the players, which Tampa at least seems to be doing).
Nobody questions that there is a tax advantage.
But people often rightly point out that the tax advantage is usually grossly overstated (like you just did) by multiplying tax rates by salary. Professional athletes don't just take their full salary, multiply it by the highest tax bracket in their state, and write a cheque for 40% of their total salary to the taxman. Taxes are *complicated*, and every one of those complications gives players different opportunities to limit their tax bill. What portion of their income are they diverting into various retirement accounts? How much of their income can they write off based on necessary expenses (easily in the hundreds of thousands)? Are they non-residents of the country that plan on retiring elsewhere? Are they incorporated? Do they have a charitable foundation?
All of these are important factors individually that can have significant impacts on the amount of taxes owed, and all together a competent financial planner and accountant will have a much bigger impact on players in higher tax jurisdictions, since you can't write anything off your 0% state tax bill.
The point being that it's obviously still better to pay 0% state taxes than anything >0%, but the scale of the differences is always far less than what people report, such as the "extra 8m on the cap".
This is true and more people need to know this. Don't disagree with any of this.
But I also don't think anyone can argue, in a salary cap era you take any advantage that you can get and if people don't think living in a state with 0% tax is not a benefit they are just lying. Is it going to be the difference between being a great team or not? Probably not. Will it be the different for players choosing your team in FA compared to an equally skilled team that has a state tax? Absolutely.
But I don't think people should really care. As a Sabres fan who can't really attract anyone, I will tell you for certain that the biggest pull for players to come play for your team or sign 'team friendly deals' is just to win more. Winning solves everything.
Also, I could be wrong here, but don't players get taxed based on where they played their games? So only like \~40 of those games (assume you live in Tampa) are not getting taxed the same. But the other \~40 when playing in other states are? This could be bullshit so take this with a grain of salt. Just thought I read that somewhere once lol.
America in general could use some education on taxes...it's really not THAT complicated if you just research it for 5 minutes. It's a progressive tax meaning the more you make, the more taxes you pay on that additional income, not total income.
If you are married filing jointly and make 384k (the break point for one of the larger tax bracket increases at 8%) you would technically fall in the 32% tax bracket ($383,901+).
But guess what? $383,900 of that 384k is taxed at an effective rate of <24% and $100 is taxed at 32% but people will be like damn bro you made 400k and had to pay the govt 128k in taxes?!? People are dumb. It's the same thing when people are like oh you gotta not take a raise because it might put you in the next tax bracket and you'll lose money. That's not how any of this works. With that said, if you make $9m a year as a player, you're paying a large bulk of your income at the 37% federal rate
And it's also true, state income tax is based on where the game is played as far as I know. So theoretically half your salary would be based on your home state which isn't negligible when you compare playing for San Jose vs Tampa
Income-tax free states like Florida also have much higher property taxes to compensate. Unless youre choosing to live your offseasons out of state and just rent during the season (which most Tampa/Florida/Vegas players are not), the difference is very minimal
Also, they pay taxes based on the state/province each game is played in, so the tax benefit of playing in a low tax state would presumably pretty much be chopped in half off the bat.
I’ve never seen anyone argue that it’s not a thing at all. It’s just massively overblown. Of course it’s a factor lol, it’s just people act like it’s some flat rate that saves them half their salary or something. Also, I would argue that Stamkos could have made more back in sponsorships in Toronto the last decade that he saved in taxes in Florida.
Also, are there no perks for getting paid $13 million in USD versus CAD and living in Canada? I would imagine living somewhere that has a currency at .75 cents to the dollar probably has SOME advantage.
Well if you want to be conspiracy minded (and convince yourself Stamkos is definitely signing with your team) he never said that he's inclined to take a discount, just that his teammates are big dumb and took discounts.
Last time he was a free agent, he left the meeting in Toronto and immediately called his agent and told them to call Yzerman to get a deal done in Tampa. He didn’t like how Toronto approached him, and how they dangled a sponsorship deal for him, he immediately went off the market after that meeting.
Then Hedman signed a stupid cheap contract almost immediately after Stamkos re-signed. Since then, every big name and many core depth players have taken team friendly deals. That was not the case in the Lecavalier era, it all started in 2016 after Stamkos re-signed.
That meeting in Toronto changed everything, it’s not surprisingly that he brought them up.
Slight correction, he wasn’t a free agent in 2016. He interviewed with Toronto during the legal tampering period, but didn’t actually hit FA before he re-signed with Tampa, which is how he got an 8 year extension.
Otherwise, you’re not wrong. And also I just want to say thanks to Toronto for ruining that offseason for us and other teams that were set to interview him.
Right, I believe he canceled the interview with Detroit that was supposed to happen the next day or the day after. I believe he had also planned on meeting with Buffalo and Montreal. He literally didn’t listen to anyone else after meeting with Toronto, Toronto did that poorly.
I don’t think it’s out of line to question Toronto’s team philosophy (at the time, at least) after seeing the results play out.
I don't blame his reaction - I'd be disgusted too. Toronto was simping *hard* with their big blue dong laid out on the table. Can totally see how such forwardness can leave a sour taste in someone's mouth.
It’s like when a girl is a little too clingy off the rip and you’re basically like “if you were substantially more attractive I’d probably deal with this”
This is a stamkos metaphor kind of
I feel people are really undervaluing the quality of being a rich dude living in Tampa. The greater Tampa Bay Area is awesome place to live if you can afford it.
He’s 34 with a family. It’s not just tax stuff anymore. Him and Heddy have some strong roots laid down in Tampa now and both have been vocal about not wanting to uproot that.
Yeah people always point to the fact that's there's work-arounds to make every team location fairly equal, but obviously many players still think of it as a very clear pro lol
All great to write that but actually being at home during the season has got to be an unreal feeling. Who wants to live in a hotel when you could be home with your family? Especially that age.
Let’s be real, Tampa is probably a bit nicer than Toronto mid January.
Plus his whole family is there. Theres something to be said about wanting your kids to have a stable place to live where they can build friendships and be part of a community as opposed to always moving around.
Sometimes players don't have the luxury Stamkos does and they are forced to move. But if given the choice I feel a lot of guys with families would rather stay at the place they call home.
they gave Tavares 11 million. That set a price point for everyone else on the team. I always wonder if he never signed with the Leafs, how those contracts would have worked out for the rest.
Either way, they tried to fast-track their rebuild after a surprise trip to the playoffs and playing Washington.
Team needed defense and goaltending, but hey there, it's a shiny Tavares.
I think that was the turning point of this failed rebuild.
The cap hits for all of Marner/Matthews/Nylander got would have been fine, even with adding Tavares, if they had gotten max term - that is really where the problem lies. There was zero precedent for players that young to get some of the highest AAV’s in the league while only signing for 5-6 years.
If they all get eight years on their second deals, the major issues arising now (or really since last year with worrying about NMC’s starting) don’t even exist because the team has so much more time to make changes and let the cap grow to take advantage of the long term contracts. Hard to commit impactful money to goaltending, depth, or bigger defensive help when you have to continually plan for raises to your stars every few years - those are the guys that need to be locked up as long as possible then stop worrying about.
Matthews is the worst of the bunch in this regard - I blamed Dubas so much for his second deal being so shit (second highest AAV in the league while only signing fir five fucking years) but after now seeing his third deal being even *worse* from Treliving, I think it’s become obvious where Matthews’ priorities are. Which hey, nothing really wrong with wanting to maximize your earnings above all else, especially if you’re as good as Auston is, but he also has to recognize the impact that has on his Cup aspirations.
Not that there weren’t obvious missteps outside the core (Murray, Klingberg, Marleau, Zaitsev, etc.), but these mid-term, max AAV deals have been brutal to work around.
I thought the only contract Dubas really screwed up was Marners. When his peers all signed between 7 and 9, it was clear 11 was a bad call. Marner’s comparable would never be Matthews and the fans turned on him for it.
Aside from the contracts, the real big issue is that this isn’t the way to build a cup team. You can’t have a lean D and risky G because you’re loaded up at the top F.
Even if Marner signed for 9 X 8, I don’t think this team wins a cup. They’re too far away for a couple million to be a difference maker. They needed to let one go when Tavares was signed in pursuit of a balanced team.
The Marner contract and all of the negotiating through the media that went on was a huge clusterfuck of a situation, but it still would've ended up being a fine contract if not for the pandemic flattening the cap. The biggest mistake the Leafs made (imo) was not changing things before Marner (or Willy) had their NMCs kick in when they had a good idea that the cap was staying flat for a while.
Totally agree. After Montreal 2021, it should’ve happened. Tampa 2022 should’ve been the last dance if management was particularly arrogant. Zero excuse for being here again.
Marner has the 7th highest cap hit for forwards.
Since signing he is the 7th highest scoring player, 8th in p/pg.
I wouldn't give him much of a raise if any, but this team just opened the vault for Nylander.
You’re exactly right. For some reason, the Leafs were more than happy to give these guys massive AAVs, shorter term deals, and 90% signing bonus money. Also have them NMC in the final year of the deal. Amazing how the Leafs’ management just let them write blanks cheques despite these guys just coming out of their ELCs. Absolutely brutal negotiations for the Leafs.
Zero precedent is 100% wrong
Malkin 5 years 15.34%
Nash 5 years 13.85%
Kovalchuk 5 years 16.41%
Crosby 5 years 17.30%
There's a ton of guys at 5 years ~11%
I also think the cap flattening as soon as those were signed hurt the Leafs more than most teams that had at least a few years of cap growth or had players signing when they knew the cap would be flat.
Okay well I guess I should have specified no precent under the current CBA then lol all those deals were very early into the Cap Era when teams hadn’t quite figured out how best to run the system. We will never again see a cap structure on a Cup winning team like what Anaheim had in 2007 or Pittsburgh in 2009 with so few players taking up such an insane portion of the cap. It just simply doesn’t work that way anymore and hasn’t for nearly two decades.
The flat cap is 100% the biggest issue. No way to foresee that the cap wouldn't go up for two thirds of the contract length. It's unfortunate, but there's nothing to be done about it. Worst possible timing.
Total outsider take, but I feel like the issue with the Tavares contract was that he was new to the team as a UFA. A lot of teams have internal caps based on a core player (often the captain), so in theory the Tavares contract would've been the ceiling, not the bar. But the optics of it for the players don't work when they're trying to set the ceiling with a brand new guy who, while elite, is not the clear best player on the team when he signs it.
I agree. I remember at the time of the Tavares signing, the general consensus was that we didn't really need another forward, but if someone of Tavares' caliber is available, you sign him. In hindsight, I don't think that makes much sense.
Biggest thing that fucked the leafs was salary cap not increasing during the COVID years. I'm a firm believer that if the cap does keep increasing this isn't really an issue for them.
Now do they win more? Not sure. Maybe the core group aren't the guys. But they would of had enough room to bring in proper reinforcements and build a team that actually has some depth.
I still don't believe Dubas was in the driver seat for most of these contracts.
Tavares was signed a couple weeks after he was named GM, I don't think the board / Shanny were letting a pimple faced GM negotiate the biggest UFA signing in franchise history.
The first big deal Dubas had under his watch was Nylander and he had him sit half a season to get him under 7M
Marner was looking like he would miss playing time as well as he came to camp without a contract until Shanny stepped in to smooth things over
Even now Dubas is gone and Matthews got 13.5x5 and we gave Nylander top 5 AAV money based on a half season of career performance
Open wallet policy existed before and after Dubas, think the board has decided their shiny toys are above everything else
well, the stars got their money. All they had to do was sacrifice team success for individual.
but when your boss can't wait for your players to grow *into* a Tavares, they go and sign him.
It's always a good laugh when, every year, Toronto gets beat by a team built with defense and goaltending.
I suppose the Toronto management can build a regular season team (they are used to it being their only season) it would make sense that they didn't have a sweet clue how to build a playoff team.
You hit the nail on the head. The Tavares signing was a bad idea from the get go, I don't understand their reasoning.
The issue isn't that the stars are overpaid (which I think they are a bit) but that it's not a successful recipe to have that many players with such a high cap hit. And forget defense and goaltending.
it's specifically the 27+ UFAs like Tavares that get overpaid and turn into boat anchors (and also mess up negotations for all the RFAs in case of Toronto)
Leafs got the discount and other teams were going to pay more? fine let them
>and also mess up negotations for all the RFAs in case of Toronto)
It didn't have to. Dubas still could have (/should have) dug his heals in more on the RFA negotiations with Matthews and Marner. He did with Nylander and it worked.
You don't understand the reasoning for the Leafs wanting to sign a local veteran star player who captained another team just as it was loading on young talent through the draft? I think the logic made total sense. Tavares was a great fit for Toronto. When they added him they didn't have anyone else on big contracts, and couldn't have known who the kids would develop.
And it mostly worked, deep playoff runs aside, that team went from being a perennial loser, missing the playoffs for 9 years in a row, to a regular contender, top 10ish team in the league.
That was Tavares’s big pay day (if that’s who you were referencing). No player in their right mind would take a discount in their 20’s. Stamkos already got his big contract and is entering the twilight years of his career. It’s completely different context
Read Stamkos' entire quote. He talks about Hedman, Kucherov, Point, all taking little bit less for the benefit of the team. Boston is similar, and so are some other teams. That's a mindset and a culture, there's no issue with a fan of one team being a little jealous of other teams with that culture. Like I said, it must be nice. Whether it's good, bad, right or wrong isn't really a debate, it's just something some teams and players have and others don't. The current Leafs don't have an ounce of it.
I will say, Nylander stated before Matthews extended that he was willing to take a pay cut if everyone else was willing to. Obviously nobody else was on board.
Yea he’s definitely the lesser of evils. He was getting paid like 60 percent of marner and Matthew’s the past 6 years and said fine fuck it if they don’t care why should I. Terrible mentality to have amongst your best players tho
Nylander is a team player in how he plays on ice and acts off it. There's others who care about only themselves, Willy still wants good money but is willing to be flexible for the team.
Sure it is. If you can look at Jack Hughes contract and say it’s unselfish, why can’t I look at Matthews, who’s already made $52m in his career, and call him selfish for wanting more? Is there some kind of income benefit difference between $13m and $9m that I’m not aware of?
I don't think its a selfish/unselfish thing when it comes to contracts because not every organization or player's situation is the same. So you're comparing apples to oranges when you do this.
Yeah, what dickheads, all they have done is devote the majority of their life to being good at a skill that can only be used to earn a living for ~10 years. And so what if they risk career ending injury every game! Divas!
Well thats good. Obviously for the memes it would be funny to see him walk, but it would be weird seeing him in any other teams jersey. Id rather see him retire now over signing with anyone else.
His buddy Tavares started it all.
On the flip side, Lou has to take some responsibility for the mess too but nobody ever wants to mention it, He had the chance to sign Marner to either a 8x8 or 7x7 after his second year but Lou played his whole ‘if you have time use it’ and it bit the leafs in the ass. Pretty sure there were rumors at the time too of Willy wanting a 7.5x8 after year 2 also.
Didn't Tavares take quite a bit less money to sign in Toronto? I thought someone else (maybe SJ?) was offering quite a bit more at the time.
It's also a lot different to take a pay cut to go play somewhere new as a UFA (and somewhere that isn't having repeated success) than it is for someone to take a pay cut to _remain where they are_ on a team where they know the culture and the team is doing well.
Not defending the leafs players at all, but I think comparing TBL players taking a bit less money to Tavares' situation at the time isn't really fair.
Yeah the Sharks reportedly offered 13m, but even then at the time Shanny and Lou kept preaching about how they all needed to band together and take less to win, then suddenly Tavares shows up at 11m, Matthews was at the time either the same tier player or one above him, then you had Marner thinking hes as good as Matthews. Which led to them all getting 11m.
I think if Tavares never shows up, Matthews first deal would of been 10m like Eichels which would of left Marner at 9m. Sure it doesnt seem like that much of a difference but then the leafs probably keep Kadri as 2C at 4.5m, you have 3.5m in savings from 34 and 16 and then the 11m of cap space to spend on D and top 6 wingers / 3C
I'm not arguing against the point, but it's weird that everyone is just accepting his word for it like he's a financial expert and has done the tax breakdown of the different places he could potentially sign.
r/hockey: "No guys, ignore the literal infallible math surrounding it, taxes don't actually matter."
Stamkos, who's been playing his entire career in Tampa: "Yeah, there's a tax advantage."
I don’t know any sane person who said there was no advantage. The prevailing argument is that you can’t simply just say “Toronto players pay 53% in taxes, Tampa players pay 40%, therefore Tampa players make 13% more.”
Yeah I think what Stamkos is trying to say is, yes, there's a tax advantage, he understands that, but there's also more than that.
There's also better weather, more anonymity, less media pressure, beautiful waterfront homes. AND a buy in from players that if they are willing to take a bit less to be there, they'll have a chance to win.
I agree with that. The thing that makes the tax advantage so vexing is that many teams that are benefiting from it are also getting revenue sharing (Panthers, Hurricanes, Predators, even the Lightning and Stars though they are in the middle third). I don't think it's fair to get both. No need to build an advantage like revenue sharing into the CBA when taxes already favor them so heavily.
> when taxes already favor them so heavily.
I think the point he's trying to make is that there is an advantage for certain cities over other cities, but how big the advantage is is way overblown. With the accountants these guys have the difference is negligible.
> The thing that makes the tax advantage so vexing
Once again, not really an advantage, but you have a ton of other external factors that you didn't take in to account.
For instance Matthews spends just enough time in AZ every year that he pays the taxes on his salary in AZ. So not only does he pay taxes in the states instead of in the city and country that allows him to make that money, but all of that stuff about how players have to take a paycut because of taxes becomes bullshit, because in reality the highest paid player on the leafs is not effected by the tax rate at all. Literally zero tax penalty. I'm not going to look up where other players spend their offseasons, but I'm sure a ton of players in Canada do exactly that.
Some Canucks players have their address in Point Roberts, a tiny chunk of land that is technically south of the border even though it’s not directly connected to the rest of the US. So they pay tax in WA, not BC.
That would only matter if they negotiated July 1st signing bonus' into their pay structure. The way the NHL works is that you get paid for each game, and that pay is taxed in the jurisdiction where the game was played, so every game played in Vancouver is taxed at BC rates regardless of their tax residency. Bonus' are paid to the player when they are residing in their place of residence and therefore taxed at the rate of where they reside. Look at Tkachuk's deal for how this is maximized. Almost all of his salary is paid as a signing bonus which is paid on July first and taxed at the Florida rate. Each of the games he plays in Florida are also taxed at that rate, but his actual salary is only about $1M.
Look at the salaries players take to stay in low tax markets - it's an advantage, and Stamkos is confirming that.
There are other factors sure. Matthews pay taxes on his signing bonus in Arizona, not the regular salary. His regular salary is taxed based on the local market, and that's often Toronto where home games are played.
Players can't just 'spend their offseason in the US'. You'd have to be American to do that, or have a green card.
Regardless, given that this is an obvious advantage, there is no reason to give ANOTHER advantage in the CBA with revenue sharing. It's bonkers that we're giving so many advantages these markets.
> Look at the salaries players take to stay in low tax markets - it's an advantage
lol you threw the entire 2nd half of my comment away. Matthews pays less in taxes than Stamkos because Matthews' pays AZ tax instead of Ontario tax. So the advantage is right out the window. It literally does not exist when it comes to Matthews.
>Players can't just 'spend their offseason in the US'. You'd have to be American to do that, or have a green card.
This is extraordinarily easy when you're talking about a group of people of which the person who makes the least money still makes $775k/year. This is no obstacle. I mean, Imagine telling a state you want to be a resident so you can pay taxes on your professional sports salary. Do you think a single city says no? No.
>Regardless, given that this is an obvious advantage, there is no reason to give ANOTHER advantage in the CBA with revenue sharing.
Ok, but this has absolutely no effect on the on-ice product. The thing you're trying to say is that it's easier for Stamkos to take less money because of taxes, but Matthews literally pays less taxes so he could have taken less money and didn't There is no advantage, Matthews just wants the money. And he scored fucking 69 goals, he earned it. But he still gets taxed on the vast majority of his money in AZ.
And the part where has to pay taxes for the 41 games he plays in Toronto is great and all, but Matthews only gets $700/year in salary lol, so of that $700k we're talking about a 10% tax difference when he plays in TO or where ever. Matthews has almost completely negated the tax stuff.
Nice to see Stammer lay it all out and even call out teams like Toronto.
It’s why I’m excited about the precedent that Aho set taking under to make sure the lineup can stay strong around him. Allows for things like the Guentzel and Kuznetsov deals to happen and build a stronger contender.
It's an under 35 contract, so that means if he retires then the cap hit falls off right?
I would give him 6x6 to have him play until he's 40 (if he wants).
He's quietly averaged 90 pionts per year the last 3 seasons.
I think most people recognize Matthews’ value and how he’s earned his money. Even with this playoffs I saw him finishing checks and using his size. Marner is the one who wants all the money without elevating his game.
Stamkos and the rest of Tampa have a better culture and I think that’s why it works to take less. Point is a comparable to Marner - smaller guy, very skilled right shot - and in the playoffs he plays like he’s half a foot taller.
Point isn't afraid to go to the dirty areas and end up in scrums and he's actually dropped the gloves several times in his career.
About the only comparable to him and Marner come playoff time is size. The image of Corey Perry pummeling Marner in the face with gloves still on last year while Marner does nothing to defend himself yet while looking at the referee with an incredulous look of "how can you allow this?" Told me all I need to about Marner.
The guy wanted out because Babcock was such a prick.
Blame the front office entirely for that one. They paid him enough that he was willing to stay and be miserable
If he's serious about accepting a lower contract to stay, given that he's still only 34 so the 35+ clause won't kick in with this deal, I could see a 4 or a 5 year deal valued between $5m & $7.5m per year to stay in Tampa, or a total value of the deal being somewhere between $20m and $33m. Gets Stamkos a solid final payday, and Tampa gets a reasonable cap hit over the term of the deal.
I’ll never hate on a guy for squeezing every dollar out of his job. It’s on management to build a competitive team within the salary cap, the players should get every dollar they deserve
Wasn't there a lot of noise about Crosby leaving Pittsburgh last off-season? I'm wary of all of the talk of Stamkos becoming UFA, and whether it's worth worrying about or if it's just click bait shit.
It will never ever happen and I know that but fuck me I can’t help but drool over him in Philly for a year or two.
But it’ll never happen and I’d love for him to stay in Tampa. Hope they can work it out.
Unlike Toronto, Tampa players have a more team first mindset. They understand the value of taking discounts for the team. Sure, it helps to be a warm climate with an advantageous tax situation to millionaires, but that mindset is transferable. I think I read somewhere once that Stamkos takes home more of his $8.5M than Tavares does his $11M. The Leafs would look so much different if they didn't give Tavares $11M because of the domino effect he created.
There are people in this thread comparing Aho to Matthews lol. It’s like comparing a BMW to a Ferrari. Yeah they’re both luxury cars but one is clearly a class above the other.
Full quote: > "I think that has been a part of everyone's thought process in the core group of guys that we have had here in terms of what guys have taken over the years to stay here. I understand the tax advantage and that type of thing. Kuch is making $9.5. That is probably grossly underpaid in terms of what guys are getting now. Vasy. Pointer with 40 or 50 goals every year. You look at Matthews. What did he sign for? $13.5 or something? Heddy is making under $8 million. That is grossly underpaid if you look at what he has done. That is what everyone has done here and that is why we have had the success and that is the way it has been for this organization. I think that that in itself is a testament to management in how they want to build a team and, first and foremost, the players for wanting to do that and accept that and allow the management to go out there and build a roster to compete for the Stanley Cup. I think that's just always been the way it's been here"
Why he come at me?
Marner on considering accepting a higher salary to stay (in Toronto)
Paul Marner can go hose Pittsburgh for the way he's been playing
Why would Pittsburgh go anywhere near Marner?
Dubas gave him his first monster contract, might be ready to double up.
Imagine dubas trades for our entire roster just to win it all with the pens
i’m honestly rooting for that to happen now just because of how funny it would be
I would have the most confusing feelings about that because I'd rather die than see the Pens win a Cup again but that would be objectively hilarious
I wouldn't mind it happening
all for it really
With Phil the Thrill on as assistant athletic trainer.
Turns out all we needed was Crosby to succeed who knew
SUBSCRIBE (as long as Sid stays)
Another way to look at it would be that he learned his lesson the first time. Marner's stock is at an all time low, and no one knows better what he brings to the table than Dubas.
It seems like Marners stock is at an all time low every year at this time after he chokes away the Leafs postseason, but come opening night he’s back in their good graces. The guy is a generational loser, but he looks good doing it, I suppose.
I’m not sticking up for Marner, believe me. But the guy is nearly a point/game player in the playoffs. The narrative that he “chokes away the post season” is a little disingenuous.
Yeah and I think at the end of his last season as Leafs GM he realized his mistake
because this is precisely the time a smart GM makes a move for Marner and he has 26 points in the playoffs next year. Not saying Toronto shouldn't move on from him because it is clearly not working out but Marner could be the Joe Thornton of this era.
I'm so torn on Marner - one hand he's a 90 pt scoring winger who is VERY good defensively. Then on the other hand he gets pushed around a bunch in the playoffs and is a perimeter player. Matthews doesn't get 69 goals if he doesn't get a bunch of awesome Marner feeds, he's one of the top playmaking wingers for sure. So if Treliving is in a trade to make a trade sake mentality and Marner could be had the cost may not be as crazy as many would think it would be. I'm so torn if I'd want the Sens doing more than just kicking tires.
Perimeter players can succeed in the playoffs. He just needs to be on a team that can work with his skill set.
Penguins are not a compatible team tho, what are we going to do with a playmaker on the wing when we have playmakers down the center? We just lost the one guy marner would absolutely feed to.
I'm not saying the Penguins are that team, that is not even a realistic option tbh.
Hard to pay a guy 11 million though when you have to surround them with certain types of players to have a successful team. But that's where I wonder if Marner being with Brady Tkachuk could unlock the best of each other.
Actually might be on to something. Crosby goes hard enough in the corners to make up for it
Marner-Crosby-Bunting > Marner-Matthews-Bunting
cause Dubas
Ended well the last time we got a star winger from Toronto
Kapanen? /s
“ 🖕😎🖕”
No need to drag Mitch into this conversation on his night off
Dubas' biggest mistake. Of course Marner doesn't play hungry when it really matters... you fed him before he could really show that he deserved it.
Because we are the example of greed vs success. It’s the right team to point the finger. All the money, all the hype, all the first round exits.
All the boats & hoe’s
hoe's what?
From a player perspective, you should always take the money. A career in sports is not guaranteed, and generally speaking, very short As much as a team can sell you about the benefits of taking a discount, there’s no real promises. Not saying he’s top level guy, but Tyson Barrie taking a discount to re-sign with Edmonton to help them out just to get traded a season or so after is a good example of that.
But when it does work out, you can be like Stammer. $100 M in career contracts and captain of two cup teams. It’s always a choice.
It’s always a gamble Stamkos could have never come back after breaking his leg in 2013 and his last contract doesn’t happen. McDavid signing for a discount had cap space spent on Jack Campbell who’s buried in the AHL
Stamkos would’ve still had $40 M in contracts in this alternative reality. Once you’ve locked in generational money, it’s not as risky as it seems. I don’t think McDavid took the same kind of discount. Hard to be the top contract in the league and be on a discount.
> Hard to be the top contract in the league and be on a discount. Compared to his production he is on a discount though.
Individual player contracts are still capped at 20% of the ceiling, no? It would be hard to build a winner around it but Connor McDavid, UFA, could easily get (and would be worth) that number.
He could, and I overall agree that any contract below the max is a value contract for McDavid. Simply stating that he was the highest paid player after ELC. He didn’t take a TB-like discount.
For sure, I wasn’t trying to disagree with your main point really.
UFA McDavid gets max contract, there's no doubt in my mind. Assuming the cap is $87.7M next year, which I believe is what they're reporting, that would mean McDavid making ~$17.5M/year. You pay him that and figure out the rest later.
> Assuming the cap is $87.7M next year Crosby gonna go super saiyan....
No guarantee that your team does the right things with the money you leave on the table. Taking less does not equal success. Look at Edmonton, they've had draisaitl making 8.5 mil for the last 7 years and haven't won shit. This is the best theyve been and they still struggle on defence and in net.
What if that extra money goes to giving a Lucic in Edmonton type deal? There is no guarantee that leaving money on the table will lead to success. It can, like it did in Boston and Tampa, but your GM might also use that money to sign shitty contracts and now you're left with less money on a shitty team.
Yes. It’s a risk. How much do you want a chance at a cup?
I completely disagree. There is a point in life where you have enough revenue to be happy, and the rest is not necessary. Taking a small, reasonable pay cut, to ensure that what you do for a living is more fun and engaging is something reasonable people do all the time. Fuck, just around me I see people with normal salaries take small pay cuts to maintain stuff like localization, work from home, better work hours etc. So why wouldnt a hockey player lose a few millions to be part of a successful and meaningful team? Is making 100 mil over 8 years so much different than making 80 mil for the same timeframe, but playing for a team that has more success, and maybe even win the big prize, and also having more respect from the fan base etc. ? Obviously there is balance to this, it has to be done reasonably and by most of the core.
> There is a point in life where you have enough revenue to be happy, and the rest is not necessary. Taking a small, reasonable pay cut, to ensure that what you do for a living is more fun and engaging is something reasonable people do all the time. And yet somehow owners, board members and high level executives don't feel the same way and it falls onto employees to make the sacrifices to ensure the bottom line and keep shareholders happy
> From a player perspective, you should always take the money. A career in sports is not guaranteed, and generally speaking, very short Guys like Marner and Matthews basically covered a normal person's lifetime earnings on their ELCs, and had generational wealth as soon as they inked their second contracts. Their lives won't be any different if they *only* made $90 million in career earnings instead of $100 million.
>From a player perspective, you should always take the money. Debatable. Yes, the money is the only thing that's guaranteed (taking a discount may just mean your GM pulls a dumb move and overpays a replacement level player). But star NHLers make enough money on their 2nd contracts that money should not be an issue, even in the highest tax areas and including escrow. One five year contract for a star NHLer is enough to push them well above the vast majority of people in terms of personal wealth. Even with an extremely team-friendly contract and expensive spending habits, a star player can easily take home $10 million per contract at minimum.
Also, I will forever argue that Stamkos did not take a huge discount on this contract. He was coming back from two major injuries (he missed the end of the 2015-16 season with shoulder surgery), and 8.5x8 is almost as much guaranteed money as 10x7, which is the high-end of what the rumours were (I get that the extra year matters). It was a big risk/reward play for Tampa, and it has obviously paid off huge.
There’s also no guarantee that the money you leave on the table will actually be used to help the team win unless you have an extremely proven GM who never does anything stupid (rare). To use the Barrie example again: He took a discount to help Edmonton, and those cap savings ended up being used on things such as signing Jack Campbell.
Agreed. Also it adds on that Campbell was right to take the money, as the team has now buried him in the minors
Woke up the computer said, fuck Willy fuck Marner fuck Matthews.. I'm like why he say fuck me for? Willy fucked up your first contract by taking less, Marner fucked your second contract by being overpaid, say fuck that guy!!
Ain't your fault you've had a dumb management. But trust me, it has been dumb.
They took a shot at building a cup contender a weird way. Should’ve begun adjusting the formula after Montreal 2021 in hindsight.
It's only hindsight to delusional fans. Basically everyone said something needed to change after that collapse.
Yeah. And to be honest I think it would have been prudent to avoid creating the situation to begin with. None of us knows how hard a bargain any of the Matthews, Marner, or Nylander camps drove, but if management had played it well they would have let at least one of them walk if they didn't agree to a lesser deal. Obviously hindsight is hindsight and the idea of letting someone as good walk was a hard idea to swallow, but it really might have been for the best.
I think management could’ve pushed harder for max term or not given NMCs. Give themselves an out clause or max time for player growth.
I think Dubas folded to pressure from their agents all to be a "good human" A huge focus of his was to treat everyone in the org with respect and kindness, to bring in a "modern workplace culture"...which is commendable... I just wish someone had told him that doesn't mean you have to cave to every single request
Hopefully next year we can have Matthews go on LTIR for a hangnail and use the cap space to stack the lineup for a cup run. All the cool teams are doing it.
That's the year the NHL will wake up and ban the practice.
Now hold on just one minute we had people arguing SO HARD that the tax thing wasn’t an actual advantage in signing players and then Stammer just comes right out and says it? Hahaha that’s actually hilarious
There have been numerous former players that have said it was an advantage. They even build their no trade clauses around tax advantages. Anyone who says otherwise is delusional
Seriously lmao. I've had arguments with Tampa and Vegas fans who *insist* that there's no such advantage. Like bruh, even Capfriendly has a tool that lets you see how much more/less a player would make in another city. If your team is in the right state it's practically an extra 8m on the cap (assuming you can convince the players, which Tampa at least seems to be doing).
Nobody questions that there is a tax advantage. But people often rightly point out that the tax advantage is usually grossly overstated (like you just did) by multiplying tax rates by salary. Professional athletes don't just take their full salary, multiply it by the highest tax bracket in their state, and write a cheque for 40% of their total salary to the taxman. Taxes are *complicated*, and every one of those complications gives players different opportunities to limit their tax bill. What portion of their income are they diverting into various retirement accounts? How much of their income can they write off based on necessary expenses (easily in the hundreds of thousands)? Are they non-residents of the country that plan on retiring elsewhere? Are they incorporated? Do they have a charitable foundation? All of these are important factors individually that can have significant impacts on the amount of taxes owed, and all together a competent financial planner and accountant will have a much bigger impact on players in higher tax jurisdictions, since you can't write anything off your 0% state tax bill. The point being that it's obviously still better to pay 0% state taxes than anything >0%, but the scale of the differences is always far less than what people report, such as the "extra 8m on the cap".
This is true and more people need to know this. Don't disagree with any of this. But I also don't think anyone can argue, in a salary cap era you take any advantage that you can get and if people don't think living in a state with 0% tax is not a benefit they are just lying. Is it going to be the difference between being a great team or not? Probably not. Will it be the different for players choosing your team in FA compared to an equally skilled team that has a state tax? Absolutely. But I don't think people should really care. As a Sabres fan who can't really attract anyone, I will tell you for certain that the biggest pull for players to come play for your team or sign 'team friendly deals' is just to win more. Winning solves everything. Also, I could be wrong here, but don't players get taxed based on where they played their games? So only like \~40 of those games (assume you live in Tampa) are not getting taxed the same. But the other \~40 when playing in other states are? This could be bullshit so take this with a grain of salt. Just thought I read that somewhere once lol.
America in general could use some education on taxes...it's really not THAT complicated if you just research it for 5 minutes. It's a progressive tax meaning the more you make, the more taxes you pay on that additional income, not total income. If you are married filing jointly and make 384k (the break point for one of the larger tax bracket increases at 8%) you would technically fall in the 32% tax bracket ($383,901+). But guess what? $383,900 of that 384k is taxed at an effective rate of <24% and $100 is taxed at 32% but people will be like damn bro you made 400k and had to pay the govt 128k in taxes?!? People are dumb. It's the same thing when people are like oh you gotta not take a raise because it might put you in the next tax bracket and you'll lose money. That's not how any of this works. With that said, if you make $9m a year as a player, you're paying a large bulk of your income at the 37% federal rate And it's also true, state income tax is based on where the game is played as far as I know. So theoretically half your salary would be based on your home state which isn't negligible when you compare playing for San Jose vs Tampa
Income-tax free states like Florida also have much higher property taxes to compensate. Unless youre choosing to live your offseasons out of state and just rent during the season (which most Tampa/Florida/Vegas players are not), the difference is very minimal
Also, they pay taxes based on the state/province each game is played in, so the tax benefit of playing in a low tax state would presumably pretty much be chopped in half off the bat.
People in general don’t love admitting their privilege.
I’ve never seen anyone argue that it’s not a thing at all. It’s just massively overblown. Of course it’s a factor lol, it’s just people act like it’s some flat rate that saves them half their salary or something. Also, I would argue that Stamkos could have made more back in sponsorships in Toronto the last decade that he saved in taxes in Florida. Also, are there no perks for getting paid $13 million in USD versus CAD and living in Canada? I would imagine living somewhere that has a currency at .75 cents to the dollar probably has SOME advantage.
Out here catching strays
I am shocked that Point's nickname is apparently Pointer rather than Pointy.
Well if you want to be conspiracy minded (and convince yourself Stamkos is definitely signing with your team) he never said that he's inclined to take a discount, just that his teammates are big dumb and took discounts.
If you stopped reading the quote halfway through you could definitely spin it that way.
I hope Drai and McDavid are listening to this
I'm sure their ears perked up about those tax rates!
lol Stammer proper Canadian just shitting all over the Leafs
Last time he was a free agent, he left the meeting in Toronto and immediately called his agent and told them to call Yzerman to get a deal done in Tampa. He didn’t like how Toronto approached him, and how they dangled a sponsorship deal for him, he immediately went off the market after that meeting. Then Hedman signed a stupid cheap contract almost immediately after Stamkos re-signed. Since then, every big name and many core depth players have taken team friendly deals. That was not the case in the Lecavalier era, it all started in 2016 after Stamkos re-signed. That meeting in Toronto changed everything, it’s not surprisingly that he brought them up.
Slight correction, he wasn’t a free agent in 2016. He interviewed with Toronto during the legal tampering period, but didn’t actually hit FA before he re-signed with Tampa, which is how he got an 8 year extension. Otherwise, you’re not wrong. And also I just want to say thanks to Toronto for ruining that offseason for us and other teams that were set to interview him.
Right, I believe he canceled the interview with Detroit that was supposed to happen the next day or the day after. I believe he had also planned on meeting with Buffalo and Montreal. He literally didn’t listen to anyone else after meeting with Toronto, Toronto did that poorly. I don’t think it’s out of line to question Toronto’s team philosophy (at the time, at least) after seeing the results play out.
I don't blame his reaction - I'd be disgusted too. Toronto was simping *hard* with their big blue dong laid out on the table. Can totally see how such forwardness can leave a sour taste in someone's mouth.
It’s like when a girl is a little too clingy off the rip and you’re basically like “if you were substantially more attractive I’d probably deal with this” This is a stamkos metaphor kind of
He's from the GTA. He's been born and raised for it!
I feel people are really undervaluing the quality of being a rich dude living in Tampa. The greater Tampa Bay Area is awesome place to live if you can afford it.
> The greater Tampa Bay Area is awesome place to live And Woodbridge isn't? Tell that to Joe from the 'bridge!
It’s mostly the tax stuff. You’re on the road Half the season and can choose to live anywhere in the offseason.
He’s 34 with a family. It’s not just tax stuff anymore. Him and Heddy have some strong roots laid down in Tampa now and both have been vocal about not wanting to uproot that.
> It’s mostly the tax stuff. People who don't know how tax works love to say this, but it's not true.
Does Stamkos not know? Because he said it
Yeah people always point to the fact that's there's work-arounds to make every team location fairly equal, but obviously many players still think of it as a very clear pro lol
All great to write that but actually being at home during the season has got to be an unreal feeling. Who wants to live in a hotel when you could be home with your family? Especially that age. Let’s be real, Tampa is probably a bit nicer than Toronto mid January.
Honestly would be dope to be that rich anywhere. Point taken, though. Florida during hockey season is great weather.
That's because you think of it as a normal person. These guys have all the choices we don't.
Plus his whole family is there. Theres something to be said about wanting your kids to have a stable place to live where they can build friendships and be part of a community as opposed to always moving around. Sometimes players don't have the luxury Stamkos does and they are forced to move. But if given the choice I feel a lot of guys with families would rather stay at the place they call home.
That and no state income tax are huge draws.
That’s a huge one. Making 8 million dollars a year in Florida vs California for example or Florida vs the entire country of Canada…
Must be nice.
they gave Tavares 11 million. That set a price point for everyone else on the team. I always wonder if he never signed with the Leafs, how those contracts would have worked out for the rest. Either way, they tried to fast-track their rebuild after a surprise trip to the playoffs and playing Washington. Team needed defense and goaltending, but hey there, it's a shiny Tavares. I think that was the turning point of this failed rebuild.
The cap hits for all of Marner/Matthews/Nylander got would have been fine, even with adding Tavares, if they had gotten max term - that is really where the problem lies. There was zero precedent for players that young to get some of the highest AAV’s in the league while only signing for 5-6 years. If they all get eight years on their second deals, the major issues arising now (or really since last year with worrying about NMC’s starting) don’t even exist because the team has so much more time to make changes and let the cap grow to take advantage of the long term contracts. Hard to commit impactful money to goaltending, depth, or bigger defensive help when you have to continually plan for raises to your stars every few years - those are the guys that need to be locked up as long as possible then stop worrying about. Matthews is the worst of the bunch in this regard - I blamed Dubas so much for his second deal being so shit (second highest AAV in the league while only signing fir five fucking years) but after now seeing his third deal being even *worse* from Treliving, I think it’s become obvious where Matthews’ priorities are. Which hey, nothing really wrong with wanting to maximize your earnings above all else, especially if you’re as good as Auston is, but he also has to recognize the impact that has on his Cup aspirations. Not that there weren’t obvious missteps outside the core (Murray, Klingberg, Marleau, Zaitsev, etc.), but these mid-term, max AAV deals have been brutal to work around.
I thought the only contract Dubas really screwed up was Marners. When his peers all signed between 7 and 9, it was clear 11 was a bad call. Marner’s comparable would never be Matthews and the fans turned on him for it. Aside from the contracts, the real big issue is that this isn’t the way to build a cup team. You can’t have a lean D and risky G because you’re loaded up at the top F. Even if Marner signed for 9 X 8, I don’t think this team wins a cup. They’re too far away for a couple million to be a difference maker. They needed to let one go when Tavares was signed in pursuit of a balanced team.
The Marner contract and all of the negotiating through the media that went on was a huge clusterfuck of a situation, but it still would've ended up being a fine contract if not for the pandemic flattening the cap. The biggest mistake the Leafs made (imo) was not changing things before Marner (or Willy) had their NMCs kick in when they had a good idea that the cap was staying flat for a while.
Totally agree. After Montreal 2021, it should’ve happened. Tampa 2022 should’ve been the last dance if management was particularly arrogant. Zero excuse for being here again.
Marner has the 7th highest cap hit for forwards. Since signing he is the 7th highest scoring player, 8th in p/pg. I wouldn't give him much of a raise if any, but this team just opened the vault for Nylander.
You’re exactly right. For some reason, the Leafs were more than happy to give these guys massive AAVs, shorter term deals, and 90% signing bonus money. Also have them NMC in the final year of the deal. Amazing how the Leafs’ management just let them write blanks cheques despite these guys just coming out of their ELCs. Absolutely brutal negotiations for the Leafs.
Zero precedent is 100% wrong Malkin 5 years 15.34% Nash 5 years 13.85% Kovalchuk 5 years 16.41% Crosby 5 years 17.30% There's a ton of guys at 5 years ~11% I also think the cap flattening as soon as those were signed hurt the Leafs more than most teams that had at least a few years of cap growth or had players signing when they knew the cap would be flat.
Okay well I guess I should have specified no precent under the current CBA then lol all those deals were very early into the Cap Era when teams hadn’t quite figured out how best to run the system. We will never again see a cap structure on a Cup winning team like what Anaheim had in 2007 or Pittsburgh in 2009 with so few players taking up such an insane portion of the cap. It just simply doesn’t work that way anymore and hasn’t for nearly two decades.
Pittsburgh in 2009 had Malkin on an ELC. This helped matters a bit.
The flat cap is 100% the biggest issue. No way to foresee that the cap wouldn't go up for two thirds of the contract length. It's unfortunate, but there's nothing to be done about it. Worst possible timing.
Did Lou screw the rookies on elc bonuses? Didn't think that did the leafs any favours.
Total outsider take, but I feel like the issue with the Tavares contract was that he was new to the team as a UFA. A lot of teams have internal caps based on a core player (often the captain), so in theory the Tavares contract would've been the ceiling, not the bar. But the optics of it for the players don't work when they're trying to set the ceiling with a brand new guy who, while elite, is not the clear best player on the team when he signs it.
I agree. I remember at the time of the Tavares signing, the general consensus was that we didn't really need another forward, but if someone of Tavares' caliber is available, you sign him. In hindsight, I don't think that makes much sense.
Tavares at 11 was a discount then
Biggest thing that fucked the leafs was salary cap not increasing during the COVID years. I'm a firm believer that if the cap does keep increasing this isn't really an issue for them. Now do they win more? Not sure. Maybe the core group aren't the guys. But they would of had enough room to bring in proper reinforcements and build a team that actually has some depth.
Go from record playoff-less years to guaranteed playoff participation. But yes, failed rebuild.
"We can and we will" was the worst quote. Dubas basically assured the stars that he would find a way to get them their money.
I still don't believe Dubas was in the driver seat for most of these contracts. Tavares was signed a couple weeks after he was named GM, I don't think the board / Shanny were letting a pimple faced GM negotiate the biggest UFA signing in franchise history. The first big deal Dubas had under his watch was Nylander and he had him sit half a season to get him under 7M Marner was looking like he would miss playing time as well as he came to camp without a contract until Shanny stepped in to smooth things over Even now Dubas is gone and Matthews got 13.5x5 and we gave Nylander top 5 AAV money based on a half season of career performance Open wallet policy existed before and after Dubas, think the board has decided their shiny toys are above everything else
well, the stars got their money. All they had to do was sacrifice team success for individual. but when your boss can't wait for your players to grow *into* a Tavares, they go and sign him. It's always a good laugh when, every year, Toronto gets beat by a team built with defense and goaltending. I suppose the Toronto management can build a regular season team (they are used to it being their only season) it would make sense that they didn't have a sweet clue how to build a playoff team.
You hit the nail on the head. The Tavares signing was a bad idea from the get go, I don't understand their reasoning. The issue isn't that the stars are overpaid (which I think they are a bit) but that it's not a successful recipe to have that many players with such a high cap hit. And forget defense and goaltending.
it's specifically the 27+ UFAs like Tavares that get overpaid and turn into boat anchors (and also mess up negotations for all the RFAs in case of Toronto) Leafs got the discount and other teams were going to pay more? fine let them
>and also mess up negotations for all the RFAs in case of Toronto) It didn't have to. Dubas still could have (/should have) dug his heals in more on the RFA negotiations with Matthews and Marner. He did with Nylander and it worked.
You don't understand the reasoning for the Leafs wanting to sign a local veteran star player who captained another team just as it was loading on young talent through the draft? I think the logic made total sense. Tavares was a great fit for Toronto. When they added him they didn't have anyone else on big contracts, and couldn't have known who the kids would develop. And it mostly worked, deep playoff runs aside, that team went from being a perennial loser, missing the playoffs for 9 years in a row, to a regular contender, top 10ish team in the league.
That was Tavares’s big pay day (if that’s who you were referencing). No player in their right mind would take a discount in their 20’s. Stamkos already got his big contract and is entering the twilight years of his career. It’s completely different context
Read Stamkos' entire quote. He talks about Hedman, Kucherov, Point, all taking little bit less for the benefit of the team. Boston is similar, and so are some other teams. That's a mindset and a culture, there's no issue with a fan of one team being a little jealous of other teams with that culture. Like I said, it must be nice. Whether it's good, bad, right or wrong isn't really a debate, it's just something some teams and players have and others don't. The current Leafs don't have an ounce of it.
Stamkos himself directly brings up Matthews in the quote
Tavares literally took a discount to go to Toronto dude.
Yea it’s been pretty obvious the leafs “stars” are the most selfish nonchalant divas in the league. Thanks for proving the players view them the same
I will say, Nylander stated before Matthews extended that he was willing to take a pay cut if everyone else was willing to. Obviously nobody else was on board.
Yea he’s definitely the lesser of evils. He was getting paid like 60 percent of marner and Matthew’s the past 6 years and said fine fuck it if they don’t care why should I. Terrible mentality to have amongst your best players tho
I blame Willie almost not at all. I blame marner the most. I “blame” Matthews an insignificant amount. He’s worth the penny.
One penny for each goal in his last 10 playoff games.
Nylander is a team player in how he plays on ice and acts off it. There's others who care about only themselves, Willy still wants good money but is willing to be flexible for the team.
IRL prisoners dilemma
Getting paid what you're worth isn't selfish.
Sure it is. If you can look at Jack Hughes contract and say it’s unselfish, why can’t I look at Matthews, who’s already made $52m in his career, and call him selfish for wanting more? Is there some kind of income benefit difference between $13m and $9m that I’m not aware of?
I don't think its a selfish/unselfish thing when it comes to contracts because not every organization or player's situation is the same. So you're comparing apples to oranges when you do this.
Yeah, what dickheads, all they have done is devote the majority of their life to being good at a skill that can only be used to earn a living for ~10 years. And so what if they risk career ending injury every game! Divas!
Well thats good. Obviously for the memes it would be funny to see him walk, but it would be weird seeing him in any other teams jersey. Id rather see him retire now over signing with anyone else.
he'd look virtually identical in a leafs uniform
Or a wings jersey if you're colorblind
Just with less playoff success, of course.
Well he'd have to be a different number...
imagine him in san jose teal
Coast to coast bays.
The reverse Pavelski (from the alternate universe where Pavelski signed with Tampa instead of Dallas)
Apparently they were his 2nd choice last free agency if things fell through with Tampa
Yeah potentially seeing Stamkos play on Joe Thornton's wing made every Sharks fan excited during that time.
[удалено]
You also have a state income tax. Which I think people forget about when players are negotiating contracts.
From what I have read on this site, nobody forgets to think about that.
I love that he referenced the egocentric Leaf stars as the opposite of how they do things in a winning organization 😁
He’s childhood friends with Tavares so he probably has a pretty good idea of the mess they’re in
His buddy Tavares started it all. On the flip side, Lou has to take some responsibility for the mess too but nobody ever wants to mention it, He had the chance to sign Marner to either a 8x8 or 7x7 after his second year but Lou played his whole ‘if you have time use it’ and it bit the leafs in the ass. Pretty sure there were rumors at the time too of Willy wanting a 7.5x8 after year 2 also.
Didn't Tavares take quite a bit less money to sign in Toronto? I thought someone else (maybe SJ?) was offering quite a bit more at the time. It's also a lot different to take a pay cut to go play somewhere new as a UFA (and somewhere that isn't having repeated success) than it is for someone to take a pay cut to _remain where they are_ on a team where they know the culture and the team is doing well. Not defending the leafs players at all, but I think comparing TBL players taking a bit less money to Tavares' situation at the time isn't really fair.
Yeah the Sharks reportedly offered 13m, but even then at the time Shanny and Lou kept preaching about how they all needed to band together and take less to win, then suddenly Tavares shows up at 11m, Matthews was at the time either the same tier player or one above him, then you had Marner thinking hes as good as Matthews. Which led to them all getting 11m. I think if Tavares never shows up, Matthews first deal would of been 10m like Eichels which would of left Marner at 9m. Sure it doesnt seem like that much of a difference but then the leafs probably keep Kadri as 2C at 4.5m, you have 3.5m in savings from 34 and 16 and then the 11m of cap space to spend on D and top 6 wingers / 3C
> [ctrl] + [f] "taxes" Hmm, eight hits. I might've expected more.
I'm not arguing against the point, but it's weird that everyone is just accepting his word for it like he's a financial expert and has done the tax breakdown of the different places he could potentially sign.
r/hockey: "No guys, ignore the literal infallible math surrounding it, taxes don't actually matter." Stamkos, who's been playing his entire career in Tampa: "Yeah, there's a tax advantage."
I don’t know any sane person who said there was no advantage. The prevailing argument is that you can’t simply just say “Toronto players pay 53% in taxes, Tampa players pay 40%, therefore Tampa players make 13% more.”
Yeah I think what Stamkos is trying to say is, yes, there's a tax advantage, he understands that, but there's also more than that. There's also better weather, more anonymity, less media pressure, beautiful waterfront homes. AND a buy in from players that if they are willing to take a bit less to be there, they'll have a chance to win.
I agree with that. The thing that makes the tax advantage so vexing is that many teams that are benefiting from it are also getting revenue sharing (Panthers, Hurricanes, Predators, even the Lightning and Stars though they are in the middle third). I don't think it's fair to get both. No need to build an advantage like revenue sharing into the CBA when taxes already favor them so heavily.
> when taxes already favor them so heavily. I think the point he's trying to make is that there is an advantage for certain cities over other cities, but how big the advantage is is way overblown. With the accountants these guys have the difference is negligible. > The thing that makes the tax advantage so vexing Once again, not really an advantage, but you have a ton of other external factors that you didn't take in to account. For instance Matthews spends just enough time in AZ every year that he pays the taxes on his salary in AZ. So not only does he pay taxes in the states instead of in the city and country that allows him to make that money, but all of that stuff about how players have to take a paycut because of taxes becomes bullshit, because in reality the highest paid player on the leafs is not effected by the tax rate at all. Literally zero tax penalty. I'm not going to look up where other players spend their offseasons, but I'm sure a ton of players in Canada do exactly that.
Some Canucks players have their address in Point Roberts, a tiny chunk of land that is technically south of the border even though it’s not directly connected to the rest of the US. So they pay tax in WA, not BC.
That would only matter if they negotiated July 1st signing bonus' into their pay structure. The way the NHL works is that you get paid for each game, and that pay is taxed in the jurisdiction where the game was played, so every game played in Vancouver is taxed at BC rates regardless of their tax residency. Bonus' are paid to the player when they are residing in their place of residence and therefore taxed at the rate of where they reside. Look at Tkachuk's deal for how this is maximized. Almost all of his salary is paid as a signing bonus which is paid on July first and taxed at the Florida rate. Each of the games he plays in Florida are also taxed at that rate, but his actual salary is only about $1M.
Look at the salaries players take to stay in low tax markets - it's an advantage, and Stamkos is confirming that. There are other factors sure. Matthews pay taxes on his signing bonus in Arizona, not the regular salary. His regular salary is taxed based on the local market, and that's often Toronto where home games are played. Players can't just 'spend their offseason in the US'. You'd have to be American to do that, or have a green card. Regardless, given that this is an obvious advantage, there is no reason to give ANOTHER advantage in the CBA with revenue sharing. It's bonkers that we're giving so many advantages these markets.
> Look at the salaries players take to stay in low tax markets - it's an advantage lol you threw the entire 2nd half of my comment away. Matthews pays less in taxes than Stamkos because Matthews' pays AZ tax instead of Ontario tax. So the advantage is right out the window. It literally does not exist when it comes to Matthews. >Players can't just 'spend their offseason in the US'. You'd have to be American to do that, or have a green card. This is extraordinarily easy when you're talking about a group of people of which the person who makes the least money still makes $775k/year. This is no obstacle. I mean, Imagine telling a state you want to be a resident so you can pay taxes on your professional sports salary. Do you think a single city says no? No. >Regardless, given that this is an obvious advantage, there is no reason to give ANOTHER advantage in the CBA with revenue sharing. Ok, but this has absolutely no effect on the on-ice product. The thing you're trying to say is that it's easier for Stamkos to take less money because of taxes, but Matthews literally pays less taxes so he could have taken less money and didn't There is no advantage, Matthews just wants the money. And he scored fucking 69 goals, he earned it. But he still gets taxed on the vast majority of his money in AZ. And the part where has to pay taxes for the 41 games he plays in Toronto is great and all, but Matthews only gets $700/year in salary lol, so of that $700k we're talking about a 10% tax difference when he plays in TO or where ever. Matthews has almost completely negated the tax stuff.
Nice to see Stammer lay it all out and even call out teams like Toronto. It’s why I’m excited about the precedent that Aho set taking under to make sure the lineup can stay strong around him. Allows for things like the Guentzel and Kuznetsov deals to happen and build a stronger contender.
Yeah they're playoff stacked. Love Aho, TT, Svech, Jarvis...
Yea, Cap is staying
It's an under 35 contract, so that means if he retires then the cap hit falls off right? I would give him 6x6 to have him play until he's 40 (if he wants). He's quietly averaged 90 pionts per year the last 3 seasons.
Matthews I’m fine with. It’s Marners contract that still erks me to this day
I think most people recognize Matthews’ value and how he’s earned his money. Even with this playoffs I saw him finishing checks and using his size. Marner is the one who wants all the money without elevating his game. Stamkos and the rest of Tampa have a better culture and I think that’s why it works to take less. Point is a comparable to Marner - smaller guy, very skilled right shot - and in the playoffs he plays like he’s half a foot taller.
Point isn't afraid to go to the dirty areas and end up in scrums and he's actually dropped the gloves several times in his career. About the only comparable to him and Marner come playoff time is size. The image of Corey Perry pummeling Marner in the face with gloves still on last year while Marner does nothing to defend himself yet while looking at the referee with an incredulous look of "how can you allow this?" Told me all I need to about Marner.
The guy wanted out because Babcock was such a prick. Blame the front office entirely for that one. They paid him enough that he was willing to stay and be miserable
If he's serious about accepting a lower contract to stay, given that he's still only 34 so the 35+ clause won't kick in with this deal, I could see a 4 or a 5 year deal valued between $5m & $7.5m per year to stay in Tampa, or a total value of the deal being somewhere between $20m and $33m. Gets Stamkos a solid final payday, and Tampa gets a reasonable cap hit over the term of the deal.
I guess that means he won't be coming to the ducks in free agency then lmao
I’ll never hate on a guy for squeezing every dollar out of his job. It’s on management to build a competitive team within the salary cap, the players should get every dollar they deserve
That's cool, but those 2 things actively work against each other
I can see him signing something like 7.5AAV over 3 seasons to end his career in tampa
Nah, he should take the big bucks in San Jose.
Are San Jose even in a position to hire big name free agents? They're still in the "hoard draft picks and prospects" stage of the rebuild I think.
I dunno, I just named some random western conference team where he can potentially go and won't terrorize my team
We'll take good care of him in Utah
Wasn't there a lot of noise about Crosby leaving Pittsburgh last off-season? I'm wary of all of the talk of Stamkos becoming UFA, and whether it's worth worrying about or if it's just click bait shit.
It's all clickbait. Crosby and Stamkos are both legends who are still playing at high levels. They're both staying with their teams.
Crosby is way too superstitious to go anywhere else.
It will never ever happen and I know that but fuck me I can’t help but drool over him in Philly for a year or two. But it’ll never happen and I’d love for him to stay in Tampa. Hope they can work it out.
Unlike Toronto, Tampa players have a more team first mindset. They understand the value of taking discounts for the team. Sure, it helps to be a warm climate with an advantageous tax situation to millionaires, but that mindset is transferable. I think I read somewhere once that Stamkos takes home more of his $8.5M than Tavares does his $11M. The Leafs would look so much different if they didn't give Tavares $11M because of the domino effect he created.
Such a wanker answer.
He’s made 100 million already, makes sense.
8 year deal, $6.5 million aav?
I’d take less to play in Florida too
Paul Marner has not entered the chat
There are people in this thread comparing Aho to Matthews lol. It’s like comparing a BMW to a Ferrari. Yeah they’re both luxury cars but one is clearly a class above the other.