KHL Clubs Rating

[vorky]

The KHL released the clubs´ rating after 2020-2021 season. It includes the clubs´ performace for the period of the last three seasons (2018-2019 to 2020-2021).

The rating is an instrument for the KHL Board of Directors how to objectively evaluate the clubs. The KHL BoD excluded Lada & Yugra for being at the bottom of the ranking. But, it does not mean your club is automatically excluded for being at the bottom of the ranking. The KHL BoD can take other criteria into account when deciding on exclusion. All potential new clubs are evaluated on the methodics of this ranking.

The rating has 9-10 criteria – standings (20%), standings value (20%), financing (10%), salary payment (5%), arena capacity & attendance (10%), technical reglement rules (10%), TV Index (10%), match-day revenues (10%), work with social media & media outlets (5%).

Standings
It is simply the result on ice, so standing after regular-season & playoffs. The most succesful teams getting more points.

Top: CSKA, Avangard, Ak Bars, SKA, Dynamo Msc
Bottom: Sochi, Amur, KRS, Minsk & Riga

Standings value
It is the connection between the financing spent on salaries & points in the standings. So, the club with average budget but better results on ice is at the top of the ranking.

Top: Barys, Jokerit, Avangard, CSKA, Torpedo
Bottom: Traktor, Riga, Metallurg, Amur, KRS

Financing
It shows us how the club is dependant on government & state corporations funding. Less public money in your budget, more points in the rating. Three clubs are fully private-financed, they are Jokerit, Severstal, KRS. All three having all available points (10)

Top: Jokerit, Severstal, KRS, Metallurg, Avto
Bottom: Ak Bars, Sochi, Vityaz, Barys, Avangard

Salary payment
It is about players´ salaries payments by clubs. If club pays on time, getting more points. Ten clubs have been on time with salaries payments for all three seasons.

Top: Avangard, Avto, Ak Bars, Jokerit, Loko, Metallurg, Neftekhimik, Severstal, SKA, CSKA
Bottom: Sibir, Torpedo, Barys, Sochi, Amur

Arena capacity & Attendance
The league takes the arena with 12 000 seats as ideal for criterion calculation, so getting full points. Lower capacity = less points. Attendance is taken from average occupancy, only 2018-19 a 2019-20 seasons due to pandemic.

Top: SKA, Spartak, Metallurg, Minsk, Avto
Bottom: Riga, Severstal, Sochi, Neftekhimik, KRS

Technical reglement rules
It shows us if the club fulfilling all technical standards for arena. When the pandemic is over, this criterion will also include the level of service to fans at arena.

Top: Amur, Salavat Yulaev, SKA
Bottom: KRS, Sibir, Minsk

TV Index
This criterion shows the share of club on league´s revenues from TV/streaming & betting agreements. So, if the games of your clubs are often on TV & televisions pay more to the league for acquiring the rights = your club getting more points in ranking. Jokerit is undisputed leader.

Top: Jokerit, Riga, SKA, Avangard, CSKA
Bottom: Torpedo, Vityaz, Sochi, Neftekhimik, Amur

Match-day revenues
It is criterion for match-day revenues per person. The league takes into account the average workers´ salary in region. Therefore Moscow teams are at the bottom, with Jokerit
.
Top: Salavat Yulaev, Avto, Sibir, Torpedo, Metallurg
Bottom: Jokerit, Spartak, CSKA, Minsk, Vityaz, KRS

Social media
The league evaluates the clubs´ work with media, journalists & their social media accounts. It also includes the fans reaction (positive/negative comments, reposts, likes etc).

Top: Avangard, Ak Bars, SKA, CSKA, Salavat Yulaev
Bottom: Riga, Amur, Neftekhimik, Sochi, KRS

Full article. I will upload all partial graphs. The final table of the clubs´ rating is below.

Click to read more...

 

[vorky]

Standings

Standings value

Financing

 

[vorky]

Salary payment

Arena capacity & Attendance

TV Index

 

[vorky]

Match-day revenues

Social media

 

[alko]

What is the purpose of this?

 

[vorky]

What is the purpose of this?

Evaluation of the clubs. Following the clubs´ progress/regress/stagnation over years and meeting the goals stipulated in the league´s strategy. It is an objective instrument for both - league (KHL Board of Directors) and clubs. The league analyses the status of every club, pointing out what should be improved by a club & how to do it. The league´s department prepares a detailed analyses for every club & sharing it with that club with recommendations.

Last but not least, the KHL Board of Directors can decide to exclude a club if that club is not good enough for league anymore. It was done with Yugra, Lada & Nk. The clubs rating played a role in the process. The KHL BoD made a decision based on facts not emotions.

And of course, it is interesting for fans if you understand all details.

 

[vorky]

Short comment by Dobrokhvalov.

Before the 2020-2021 season the league made some changes in clubs´ rating calculation, the changes were related to focusing on the effectiveness of club management. The parameters are grouped into blocks - "Sports", "Finance", "Commerce and Communications" & "Arena". All of them directly depend on certain decisions of the club management and are interconnected. The shares of parameters in the overall rating were also redistributed. In addition, now the clubs´ rating is formed once a season, and the data are used for the last three seasons.

The clubs´ rating cannot be the basis for excluding - "Ipso facto" - a particular club from the KHL. There is no such concept at all in the KHL regulations. The clubs´ rating was originally created for the KHL Board of Directors, which approves the list of participating clubs before each season, to make its decisions based on an objective assessment of the clubs while taking into account all parameters. After the introduction of the "hard" salary cap, the main goal of the parameters was transformed, it is to evaluate the effectiveness of club management in all areas. The clubs´ rating should stimulate clubs to pay more attention to the tasks that are important for the overall development of the league.

Does the KHL consider the change of the revenue sharing mechanism, so the league´s revenues to be distributed according to the clubs´ rating?

Not yet, but we consider this option for the future, so taking the clubs´ rating into account when sharing league´s revenues with clubs.

Could be interesting for @alko & @Faterson, Slovan was 19th after 2016-2017 when the rating was originally introduced, then 22th in 2018-2019 & finally 24th (of 25 sides) in 2018-2019. The methodic was a bit different then than now.

 

[alko]

Is there any plan to support some parity in KHL?

We see there are very rich clubs, rich clubs ... and franchises that barely survive. And logic says, that rich teams have best chance to sign the best players.
In NHL they have draft system, that in some form make possible, that also the low level teams could have stars.
KHL didnt work, so they canceled it.

 

[vorky]

There are instruments for reaching parity - salary cap, relaxing league exclusivity with sponsors (for example betting companies) etc.

If you look at table, it is not anymore about two clubs.