Confirmed Signing with Link: [COL] Avalanche re-sign Mikko Rantanen (6 years, $9.25M AAV)

tucker3434

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 7, 2007
19,794
10,543
Atlanta, GA
I don't know why people give a crap about bonus money or not. You're not actually paying the guy.

It’s an interesting data point as salaries are team friendly and bonuses are player friendly. The bonus structure gives a hint at who held the power in the negotiations.

Feel free to ignore it if it makes you mad.
 

Alan Wake

It's not a loop, it's a spiral.
Dec 14, 2017
4,148
3,973
It’s an interesting data point as salaries are team friendly and bonuses are player friendly. The bonus structure gives a hint at who held the power in the negotiations.

Feel free to ignore it if it makes you mad.
You're right, fuming mad that people on this site are so devoted to their craft of being arm chair GMs that they need to find importance in bonus money, or who signs a deal with no bonus money.
 

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,285
12,586
South Mountain
As I said we will wait a few years and we can discuss.

Now to address other things that some have mentioned like it’s complicated. It is literally what every company that operates in different regions does every year. Balance salaries based on cost of living difference. The same position does not make the same salary in Tulsa as it does in Los Angeles. That accounts for some of the differences in contracts. Unlike a normal company though this league has a salary cap...you can’t staff the same sized office in LA with the same money as Tulsa. It’s not a huge deal but this next negotiation isn’t likely to be about huge things...if it were it would have been reopened. Being complicated also doesn’t mean it’s not predictable (tax rates don’t change overnight they have substantial warning before going into effect for example) and unable to be addressed.

But as I said we will see in a few years so no point discussing it now. But I will say it’s not just media saying it and there is a reason the media is saying (someone is telling them).

And the players still won’t push for this. The total amount of $ the players are paid is fixed—it’s 50% of NHL hockey related revenue (HRR).

Any change that allows a small number of teams in the highest tax rate markets who are already spending to the cap to spend even more $’s on players then currently allowed means the players on those teams get a bigger slice of the 50% HRR pie. At the expense of players on the other teams who now get a smaller slice of the 50% HRR pie—ultimately losing even more of their paychecks to escrow.

Imagine that PA union discussion: “hey everyone, we’re pushing a change where 5-10% of the union members will get a salary raise while the other 90-95% will see their paychecks shrink to offset that raise”. I don’t see the PA membership being very motivated for that.

It is a huge deal because such a change would impact every single player’s take home pay, the vast majority of them negatively.
 
Last edited:

FerrisRox

"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Sep 17, 2003
20,266
12,895
Toronto, Ontario
They absolutely will as it’s already being talked about as one of the issue along with some revenues they believe should go in the pile.

But we won’t know for a few yet so no point arguing about it.

How is it an issue for the players? Makes no sense that the players would want reign in something that has led to the kind of contracts given out to Auston Matthews and Mitch Marner.
 

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,285
12,586
South Mountain
How is it an issue for the players? Makes no sense that the players would want reign in something that has led to the kind of contracts given out to Auston Matthews and Mitch Marner.

It wouldn’t reign in contracts like Matthews and Marner. On the contrary they would have gotten even bigger deals because the Leafs would have been allowed to spend more then currently permitted.
 

Beukeboom Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
15,391
1,189
Chicago, IL
Visit site
How is it an issue for the players? Makes no sense that the players would want reign in something that has led to the kind of contracts given out to Auston Matthews and Mitch Marner.

Except that the contracts you mention come at the expense of every other player on the Leafs.

It is really about equity amongst the players. Do you think that proven NHLers want guys coming out of their ELC's to be making that when it just means that the $'s aren't available for the other guys on the roster?
 

FerrisRox

"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Sep 17, 2003
20,266
12,895
Toronto, Ontario
Except that the contracts you mention come at the expense of every other player on the Leafs.

It is really about equity amongst the players. Do you think that proven NHLers want guys coming out of their ELC's to be making that when it just means that the $'s aren't available for the other guys on the roster?

So they ask for a trade or they leave as free agents. The players like seeing salaries go up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cgf

Beukeboom Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
15,391
1,189
Chicago, IL
Visit site
So they ask for a trade or they leave as free agents. The players like seeing salaries go up.

In the pre-cap world, players loves seeing salaries go up. Think of it like this, what % if players get to cash in like this coming out of their ELC? If you are the other 99%, and a guy like Muzzin or Barrie you basically have to leave to get paid what you're worth.
 

FerrisRox

"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Sep 17, 2003
20,266
12,895
Toronto, Ontario
In the pre-cap world, players loves seeing salaries go up. Think of it like this, what % if players get to cash in like this coming out of their ELC? If you are the other 99%, and a guy like Muzzin or Barrie you basically have to leave to get paid what you're worth.

Most free agents leave to get paid what they're worth.
 

Mildan

Registered User
Jan 7, 2019
469
425
Not even close. Depending on the source, Räikkönen has made something like 250-300 million euros on his career. He got like 30-40 million euros or something per year during his prime Ferrari years. I think Häkkinen also made more per year, definitely if you account for inflation.
And Selanne also made 9.5 as his top aav what comes to hockey players
 

Lempo

Future Considerations Truther
Sponsor
Feb 23, 2014
26,670
83,005
How is it an issue for the players? Makes no sense that the players would want reign in something that has led to the kind of contracts given out to Auston Matthews and Mitch Marner.

live footage of a player pondering on whether it's better to reign in:

GustaveDore.jpg


(sorry)
 
  • Like
Reactions: cgf

CDN24

Registered User
Jun 17, 2009
3,459
2,771
It’s an interesting data point as salaries are team friendly and bonuses are player friendly. The bonus structure gives a hint at who held the power in the negotiations.

Feel free to ignore it if it makes you mad.


I think the players tax situation affects if not who gets signing bonus then who wants it. In some cases players who play in a high tax jurisdiction but are from and still live in a low tax jurisdiction in the off season then they pay tax on the bonus where they are resident not where they play. Think Austin Matthews, plays in Toronto where the top tax rate is over 53%, but is from arizona. If he retains his residency in Arizona, ie no permament ties to Canada and spends less than 180 days in Canada a year he can tax that bonus in Arizona where the top tax rate is close to 14% lower than Toronto.

Rantannen case is a bit different. he plays in a fairly low tax jurisdiction and is from Finland where the marginal rates are North of 50%. While i know little or nothing about Finnish tax law and how the salary or bonus might be taxed as a citizen or resident, he certainly does not have the same incentive as Matthews to have a lot of it as bonus to tax it in the homeland. In fact he may prefer a all salary structure if that means he only pays tax on it in Colorado.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kabidjan18

Lempo

Future Considerations Truther
Sponsor
Feb 23, 2014
26,670
83,005
It is quite a difference if the money is paid as signing bonus or in base salary. Bonus money you get up front on a set date, base salary gets paid in semi-monthly installations during the regular season. Bonus money gets paid in full and in pre-agreed time in case of buyout, whereas you will get only 13 or 2/3 of the base salary on twice th duration as was left of the SPC. Signing bonus is lockout protected, buyout protected; worth more at the date of payment as the value of the money drops constantly, and you can invest the signing bonus money when received to generate more wonga for you instead of your paymaster.
 

Jugitsu

Registered User
Dec 24, 2016
2,230
1,900
Finland
Rantannen case is a bit different. he plays in a fairly low tax jurisdiction and is from Finland where the marginal rates are North of 50%. While i know little or nothing about Finnish tax law and how the salary or bonus might be taxed as a citizen or resident, he certainly does not have the same incentive as Matthews to have a lot of it as bonus to tax it in the homeland. In fact he may prefer a all salary structure if that means he only pays tax on it in Colorado.

Finnish players don't have to pay income taxes to Finland if they spend less than 6 months a year at home. I don't think it's any different with signing bonuses, otherwise Aho wouldn't have taken signing bonuses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kabidjan18

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->