Salary Cap: Issue with State Tax

[Spirit of 67]

Seriously? Tampa has been able to sign most of their guys at a discounts, including Stamkos and Hedman.

If we had Tampa's tax advantage, Nylander would have already been signed, because that $1 mil or so gulf between Nylander and Dubas would have been negated by the tax differecne.

Is that why tams with no state taxes win the Cup every year?

With the addition of Vegas there is now 5 teams in states with no state income tax. In all the seasons they've played, there are 2 Cups.
6 Finals appearances by my count.

If it's an advantage, it's not much of one.

 

[613Leafer]

Nylander takes home slightly more money in Carolina on a 6.5M contract than he would in Toronto on an 8M contract. Frankly that's a crazy big difference, didn't realize it was that stark a contrast.

Post-Tax Earnings Calculator - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

 

[Kurtz]

Yes the money would have been similar after tax income. So the reason he did not choose Toronto wasn't money.

Well yes, exactly. I think we're arguing the same point then: Leafs paying a player $10.5 mil and TB paying him $8.5 mil amounts to the same net income for the player, yet for the Leafs it takes up more cap room.

 

[Kurtz]

Is that why tams with no state taxes win the Cup every year?

With the addition of Vegas there is now 5 teams in states with no state income tax. In all the seasons they've played, there are 2 Cups.
6 Finals appearances by my count.

If it's an advantage, it's not much of one.

That's a bit of a fallacious argument, largely due to a limited sample size, and the fact that a tax advantage is just that - one advantage. However, I'll play along.

Let's take Vegas out of the equation, as they hadn't really signed FAs prior to this offseason.

NHl has had the cap for 14 years. That's 28 team finals appearances net. 5 of those appearances were by tax-advantaged teams (18%).

Without Vegas, 4 out of 30 NHL teams have no state tax. (13%).

So despite only 13% of teams being tax-advantaged, 18% of finals appearances were by tax advantaged teams.

That amounts to a random tax-advantaged team having a 38% better chance of reaching the finals than a non-advantaged team.


Again, the sample size is too small here for this to be conclusive, but I'm merely working with the numbers that you've offered.

 

[indigobuffalo]

Not good enough to win it.

What would be your theory on why a Canadian team hasnt won the Stanley Cup in 25 years?
If all teams are equally likely to win the probability of this happening is ~ .001

Probability reverts to the mean at around 100,000 events so over a 25 event sample you could run into all kinds of weird strings of results.

We could have a string where Canadian teams win it 25 years in a row.

 

[indigobuffalo]

Isn’t it also dumb this thread exists given that we signed Tavares because he is from the GTA and took a discount to sign here?

Should the NHL apply a $2M cap penalty to Toronto for an “unfair” advantage because a large number of people that raise their kids to play hockey are located in the GTA and Ontario therefore it creates an unfair competitive advantage for Toronto.

Seriously people.

 

[ImpartialNHLfan]

Hard cap is dumb, hopefully they can make some tweaks to it after the next CBA.