Value of: Kucherov next contract

Starat327

Top .01% OnlyHands
Sponsor
May 8, 2011
37,544
74,542
Philadelphia, Pa
This is why it would be hard to take less than 10.5. I mean Toews gets that much for Fran’s sake.

Kane and Toews were paid for they'd done. Kuch will get paid for what he could do. Theres a sizable difference. Sure, Kuch is probably the better option moving forward, but he hasnt brought 3 cups in 6 years to Tampa (yet).

It's easy to say you wouldnt have signed Kane or Toews to those contracts, but you also arent the one who has to face the millions of fans after you let them go, or attempt to sign players after that, with the knowing you dont care about what they do for you. I'm willing to bet Bowman would do those contracts all over again.
 

ijuka

Registered User
May 14, 2016
22,157
14,648
Kane and Toews were paid for they'd done. Kuch will get paid for what he could do. Theres a sizable difference. Sure, Kuch is probably the better option moving forward, but he hasnt brought 3 cups in 6 years to Tampa (yet).
Toews and Kane were receiving salary when they won those 3 cups. They were just doing their jobs.

Giving a contract as a "reward" is plainly a mistake and nothing else.

Ah right, and they're not the only ones who won the three cups. Where are their 10mil "reward" deals?

This is just an excuse people use for justifying poor decisions.
 

Uncle Scrooge

Hockey Bettor
Nov 14, 2011
13,479
8,022
Helsinki
Yeah i agree with a lot of posters here. I could see a discount for number of reasons.

- Stamkos has great respect being the captain and all, and as his linemate as well, Kuch might feel like he doesn't want to be the highest paid player on the team (believe it or not, it happens)

- Tampa being Tampa, often they get players on good deals

- Giving yourself the best chance to win a cup, Tampa got a good thing going and that couple million would come in handy in icing the best team possible. Kuch is one of the more ambitious guys in the league. He wants to win a cup.

- When the current deal is done, he's already made upwards of 20M playing hockey. 68M added to that, he's rich either way.

Of course he might just prefer the money, i mean no one of us really knows. But what im saying is, seeing Kuch signing a team-friendly deal wouldn't surprise me.
 

Starat327

Top .01% OnlyHands
Sponsor
May 8, 2011
37,544
74,542
Philadelphia, Pa
Toews and Kane were receiving salary when they won those 3 cups. They were just doing their jobs.

Giving a contract as a "reward" is plainly a mistake and nothing else.

Ah right, and they're not the only ones who won the three cups. Where are their 10mil "reward" deals?

This is just an excuse people use for justifying poor decisions.

Its easy to say you dont reward past play because youre not the one that has to tell guys you only want to pay them marginally more despite what they've done.

Crawford was rewarded for his play, Keith had already signed his deal and Seabrook just got his recently, if you want to know though.

Chicago will become terrible in the next few years because of it. But you dont short change the two key people who just brought a franchise back from death unless you want to assure youre franchise isnt succesful again for a long time.
 

Raym11

Registered User
Oct 6, 2009
8,173
1,892
10 x 8 is the new standard for everybody behind Mcdavid

He's getting 9 minimum regardless of what Stamkos makes. Thats if they convince him to take less. 10M should be a safe bet
 

Brockon

Cautiously optimistic realist when caffeinated.
Aug 20, 2017
2,304
1,769
Northern Canada
The guys arguing tax breaks are solely the reason we're getting players for cheaper than market value, no the team culture is the biggest reason and the fact that the core members actually want to stay together. This really this only affects players brought up internally, it's shown very little if any influence on free agent signings, honestly a bigger deal than people make it out to be.

Because the added bonus of paying no income tax in Florida vs the potential 30-40% Canadian provincial income tax doesn't enter the equation remotely... Get real.

I'll accept that the team wants to play together, and understands that to do so, they need to allow the GM room to make moves around their cap hit. Call it team culture.

But don't for a second think that Florida's income tax laws don't play their part. Stamkos' 8.5 mil AAV is the equivalent of a 11.9 mil AAV where I live. Kucherov's 4.7 mil is the equivalent of 6.58 mil AAV after adding the taxes on top. While that doesn't affect the cap, that definitely affects the offer's dollar value impact.

So from that standpoint alone, people should look at these contract offers in a whole new light. Kucherov could demand the moon, but he's not going to be hard off if he follows Stamkos' lead and signs for 8.5-9 mil over term. And then when you look at the team as a whole and realize they're being paid 30-40% above what the listed numbers are on paper by virtue of not paying income tax... Then you should be able to grasp why Florida has so many players taking "home town" discounts.
 
Last edited:

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
28,958
17,899
Because the added bonus of paying no income tax in Florida vs the potential 30-40% Canadian provincial income tax doesn't enter the equation remotely... Get real.

I'll accept that the team wants to play together, and understands that to do so, they need to allow the GM room to make moves around their cap hit. Call it team culture.

But don't for a second think that Florida's income tax laws don't play their part. Stamkos' 8.5 mil AAV is the equivalent of a 11.9 mil AAV where I live. Kucherov's 4.7 mil is the equivalent of 6.58 mil AAV after adding the taxes on top. While that doesn't affect the cap, that definitely affects the offer's dollar value impact.

So from that standpoint alone, people should look at these contract offers in a whole new light. Kucherov could demand the moon, but he's not going to be hard off if he follows Stamkos' lead and signs for 8.5-9 mil over term. And then when you look at the team as a whole and realize they're being paid 30-40% above what the listed numbers are on paper by virtue of not paying income tax... Then you should be able to grasp why Florida has so many players taking "home town" discounts.

Nobody takes a "home town discount" on a team they don't want to be on. Again the biggest reason they re-sign is because of the environment/team culture/wanting to win, you guys arguing taxes being the main or biggest reason is dumb. The tax benefit is a bigger advantage for the GM than it is the player, if Stamkos wanted 11.4 he would've gotten it from any other team that wanted him, any team would've paid Kucherov that 6m, Palat could make 7m on the open market and Hedman 10m easily. If they signed somewhere else they would've just signed for a higher dollar amount to make up for the tax.

So no it's not as big a part - especially if you consider the majority of the roster is paid on par with league averages, so would you guys are arguing most of our roster is overpaid? Guess that's the price we pay for our star players taking discounts right?
 

Legion34

Registered User
Jan 24, 2006
17,986
8,088
Nobody takes a "home town discount" on a team they don't want to be on. Again the biggest reason they re-sign is because of the environment/team culture/wanting to win, you guys arguing taxes being the main or biggest reason is dumb. The tax benefit is a bigger advantage for the GM than it is the player, if Stamkos wanted 11.4 he would've gotten it from any other team that wanted him, any team would've paid Kucherov that 6m, Palat could make 7m on the open market and Hedman 10m easily. If they signed somewhere else they would've just signed for a higher dollar amount to make up for the tax.

So no it's not as big a part - especially if you consider the majority of the roster is paid on par with league averages, so would you guys are arguing most of our roster is overpaid? Guess that's the price we pay for our star players taking discounts right?

That’s the point. It’s not the only reason people sign in Tampa. It allows them to sign for a little less. You are clearly saying that stamkos, hedman and palat took less. But

“Hey Stamkos. Your agent thinks you can get 10.5 on the open market? Well after taxes you would get the same amount as you would here, but for 8.5”. That gives them 2
Million extra in cap. It is an unfair advantage.

Salary wasn’t the only reason players signed for a team before the cap. But those teams still had an advantage. That’s why the cap was made
 

Riptide

Registered User
Dec 29, 2011
38,887
6,520
Yukon
Toews and Kane were receiving salary when they won those 3 cups. They were just doing their jobs.

Giving a contract as a "reward" is plainly a mistake and nothing else.


Ah right, and they're not the only ones who won the three cups. Where are their 10mil "reward" deals?

This is just an excuse people use for justifying poor decisions.

And yet it happens extremely frequently with the contracts that NHL players receive. The vast majority of the contracts handed out are done so based on what the player has done in the past - especially when talking about major accomplishments like Stanley Cup's and whatnot.
 

thadd

Oil4Life
Jun 9, 2007
26,717
2,718
Canada
He signed a super cheap bridge deal.
Logic dictates he's going to push for a lot more money on this contract.
Starts at 10M.
 

Todd1a

Kucherov or prospect
Jun 19, 2014
16,389
2,747
orlando, fl
I think they will pay him the same percentage of the salary cap they gave stamkos. Since the cap will be higher in two years they will give him a little more then stamkos. i'd say 9 per year is what kucherov will sign for for a 8 year term.
 

Todd1a

Kucherov or prospect
Jun 19, 2014
16,389
2,747
orlando, fl
He signed a super cheap bridge deal.
Logic dictates he's going to push for a lot more money on this contract.
Starts at 10M.
kucherov won't cripple the team like kane and toews did with his contract i'd say between 8.5 to 9 per year he signs for in tampa.
 

The Zetterberg Era

Ball Hockey Sucks
Nov 8, 2011
40,957
11,577
Ft. Myers, FL
I think they will pay him the same percentage of the salary cap they gave stamkos. Since the cap will be higher in two years they will give him a little more then stamkos. i'd say 9 per year is what kucherov will sign for for a 8 year term.

I think that is pretty wishful thinking. Agree with the logic he cut them a break and he also had the off-season comments about working hard and not just taking your check. I don't think he thinks everyone in Tampa is earning their money in terms of Hedman and Stamkos cutting other guys in.

I think if he keeps doing what he is doing, it will be very hard to see anything under 10 happening. Kucherov is a top 10 player in the game at this point and those guys can all push for 10 million plus per.
 
Jan 9, 2007
20,118
2,088
Australia
Its easy to say you dont reward past play because youre not the one that has to tell guys you only want to pay them marginally more despite what they've done.

Crawford was rewarded for his play, Keith had already signed his deal and Seabrook just got his recently, if you want to know though.

Chicago will become terrible in the next few years because of it. But you dont short change the two key people who just brought a franchise back from death unless you want to assure youre franchise isnt succesful again for a long time.

The bolded makes zero sense with the sentence that follows.

Chicago did a great job winning those three Cups. Kane is worth his money now. I don't like lumping them together. Toews is not. The Hawks were somewhat held hostage but if you ask me it's strange they both got the same money.

Ask the Patriots about stretching winning ways over a long period of time. They almost never gave reward contracts.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->