Free agency/off season

The simple solution is for the league to adjust the cap based on net salary vs. gross. Levels the playing field for all teams including Canadian.

NY and NJ are right behind CA in income tax rates and even MA and MN are 9+. There’s a reason pundits talk about tax free states not high tax states/provinces. There are fewer no tax states than there are high tax states/provinces.

Unique advantage to a handful of markets. It’s FL, TX, TN, WA, and NV. That’s only 6 teams.
But of those 6 teams Since 2020 5 have one the cup and another 3 played and lost in the finals so there is a correlation to no tax states being able to sign and keep better players.
 
We also know which political options are currently by far the biggest terrorists of this world. It just so happens that those are the same people that want to lower taxes for the rich. Go figure.
It would be nice to raise taxes on the rich but they own and buy properties wherever they want. They have already been relocating.

If you cause them to leave, then that's lost tax revenue that must be made up by those that remain.

It's just another divide and conquer scheme.

It's an election year and suddenly we have Lyme, Hanta , Ebola and Bill Gates coincidentally funding the vaccines and food alternatives.

The media trying to scare people into another shot.

For me that is terrorism.

Also necessitates mail in voting which is very sketchy.

So which is it: are higher taxes or lower taxes for rich athletes making millions good or bad. You can't have both.
Whatever gets them to stay here and pay taxes and puts us on an even mark with other states and jurisdictions.

It's price point , supply and demand.

If you have to charge less to make more overall and in the long run you do it.

Times are tough right now for many middle class, so they come up with another inflaming , divide and conquer campaign to get them elected short term while being dishonest about the long term consequences.

The groups of states mentioned by Clif, mostly are run by one side and the other.

Again driving the rich out of the country, state or jurisdiction is a very bad thing and weakens those places.

Creating another category of taxes is a very bad thing on top of that.

Eventually thresholds will come down to middle class levels , impacting our children and grand children to an even greater degree than us.

Bait and switch.

Indignation and Anger

Lies and fraud.

Fear and panic

Injections and profits.

In and out migration tells the story.
 
Last edited:
Ok
Kuzy is gone
"Sport -Express" reports


Los Angeles Kings will not renew the contract with Andrey Kuzmenko.
there are no plans to renew the contract with the forward Andrey Kuzmenko. A reporter from «Sport-Express» Alex Shevchenko wrote in his telegram channel
He was not moving the needle.
His defensive side of the puck was not great.
We have a plethora of LW's , notably Fiala and Pan above him.
We need centers, preferably right shooters.
 
But of those 6 teams Since 2020 5 have one the cup and another 3 played and lost in the finals so there is a correlation to no tax states being able to sign and keep better players.
Not disputing that at all just saying half the league is in a similar spot as the Kings in terms of the disadvantage.
 
Ok
Kuzy is gone
"Sport -Express" reports


Los Angeles Kings will not renew the contract with Andrey Kuzmenko.
there are no plans to renew the contract with the forward Andrey Kuzmenko. A reporter from «Sport-Express» Alex Shevchenko wrote in his telegram channel
Chromiak might be a better option for RW3 and PP2. He had a breakout year in Ontario and is bigger than Kuz and only 23.
 
Chromiak might be a better option for RW3 and PP2. He had a breakout year in Ontario and is bigger than Kuz and only 23.
I'd love to see him get a nice long look.

I also find the tax information fascinating, as long as it isn't bundled with political commentary. I come here for Kings hockey, not politics. (This is a general comment, not in any way pointed at VCRW, I was just replying to the Chromiak comment and tacked this on.)
 
So which is it: are higher taxes or lower taxes for rich athletes making millions good or bad. You can't have both.

Equal taxes for all states. OR, much simpler, a way for the NHL to count net salaries instead of gross. But I guess rich lobbying owners are holding them by the b*lls...which is further proof that a lot of money concentrated in the hands of the few and freedom how to use it makes the world spin wrong.

I'm sure the issue with trades and cap in thag case could've been figured out.

It's not simple. Now when players get traded, the net cap hit would change depending upon where they ended up. All you've done is change the rules in favor of high tax teams instead of low/zero tax teams.

Also, looking at migration patterns, it isn't just the millionaires who are leaving CA/NY/NJ for TX/FL/NC/TN. This isn't a problem which is unique to the NHL.

Players sign the contract for a net salary. This ensures they get the same amount of $ wherever they are traded to. Existing contracts are annexed so that they define net salary. For players this changes nothing. For owners - those in high tax states would have to pay more, so I don't see where this system suddenyl favors the high tax states.

Cap hits would change with trades, yes...if salary/cap retention, buyouts etc. logic can be figured out, this could be, too. It would still be at least 10 times simpler than the NBA cap/trade system...

The issue with migrating millionaires could be solved with a federal defined state income tax that would level the playing field, or maybe you abolish state income taxes and increase federal taxes a bit and then distribute the money to the states based on certain metrics, weighed accordingly. Maybe you could give more to the states that suffer from young, educated people moving to rich(er) states and as a result are suffering a regression. As things stand now, a state with poor industry and negative net migration can't do much to fix that problem - if they raise taxes, more people move out, less money to develop (infrastructure, services, education, start-up subsidies etc.). If they lower taxes, not that many more people stay, because there's still no jobs short term, infrastructure and services suffer even more...

But I imagine this would be near impossible to put into legislation.
 
Last edited:
I get it but politics is whats making it very unlikely Kings and other teams in similar predicaments, win the cup
Isn't that what we want our team to win the cup or at least have a fair shot?
Well we dont have it and that is why.
 
I get it but politics is whats making it very unlikely Kings and other teams in similar predicaments, win the cup
Isn't that what we want our team to win the cup or at least have a fair shot?
Well we dont have it and that is why.

While unfairness is a fact regarding taxes, it's still not that big of a deal. VCRW pointed out the difference isn't as big (away games, signing bonuses) and while it's true that the Kings failed to attract free agents for a very long time, I don't think that has much to do with money.

Gavrikov wanted to play in LA until he didn't and wanted to go to NY. Perhaps a deep PO run would've changed his mind.

Panarin then wanted to play in LA.

Kempe (twice) and Byfield signed very reasonable/fair value extensions, all things considered. So did Laf, Mikey, Moore...

Armia signed for a very reasonable amount.

And if Ken would be able to spend 300k less on Ceci it would still be a terrible signing.

And I've yet to hear a player didn't want to waive his NMC to move to the Kings based on the fact he'd get less money in his pocket (could be wrong, though).

Ultimately, if the player doesn't want to play for the Kings because he'd earn a couple % less while still becoming a multimillionare, I guess we don't even want a player like that. A player whose priorities are of financial instead of competitive/team fit/locker room fit nature.
 
While unfairness is a fact regarding taxes, it's still not that big of a deal. VCRW pointed out the difference isn't as big (away games, signing bonuses) and while it's true that the Kings failed to attract free agents for a very long time, I don't think that has much to do with money.

Gavrikov wanted to play in LA until he didn't and wanted to go to NY. Perhaps a deep PO run would've changed his mind.

Panarin then wanted to play in LA.

Kempe (twice) and Byfield signed very reasonable/fair value extensions, all things considered. So did Laf, Mikey, Moore...

Armia signed for a very reasonable amount.

And if Ken would be able to spend 300k less on Ceci it would still be a terrible signing.

And I've yet to hear a player didn't want to waive his NMC to move to the Kings based on the fact he'd get less money in his pocket (could be wrong, though).

Ultimately, if the player doesn't want to play for the Kings because he'd earn a couple % less while still becoming a multimillionare, I guess we don't even want a player like that. A player whose priorities are of financial instead of competitive/team fit/locker room fit nature.
As others have said, there are pretty significant ways of reducing the increased tax impact on a contract. At the end of the day, though, regardless of any tax impacts these players are signing contracts that set their families up for generations.

I think it's more about winning culture. When the Kings were winning, they had no trouble attracting players to sign with them. However the last several years the Org has been in a state of stasis with no real path towards becoming a contender (though Blake did get them close).

Most players want to play for a winner and have a chance at getting their name on the Cup, even if it results in higher taxes being paid.
 
Anyone intimating that Matthew’s is a one way player hasn’t watched him play over his career. He became much more defensively responsible year over year.

In no way should he be a perennial Selke finalist just yet, but he doesn’t completely ignore his own end.

Ovechkin on the other hand….
 
As others have said, there are pretty significant ways of reducing the increased tax impact on a contract. At the end of the day, though, regardless of any tax impacts these players are signing contracts that set their families up for generations.

I think it's more about winning culture. When the Kings were winning, they had no trouble attracting players to sign with them. However the last several years the Org has been in a state of stasis with no real path towards becoming a contender (though Blake did get them close).

Most players want to play for a winner and have a chance at getting their name on the Cup, even if it results in higher taxes being paid.
Of course it’s about winning culture. Even a player based in an income tax free state generally only plays half his games there. The rest of the season is played in various states and provinces that aren’t tax free. So the tax advantage is roughly half what it’s perceived to be.

Nobody was breaking down the doors to sign with the Panthers to secure 8% extra on their paycheck back before the team had excellent management, stable ownership and a shot at the cup every season.
 
Of course it’s about winning culture. Even a player based in an income tax free state generally only plays half his games there. The rest of the season is played in various states and provinces that aren’t tax free. So the tax advantage is roughly half what it’s perceived to be.

Nobody was breaking down the doors to sign with the Panthers to secure 8% extra on their paycheck back before the team had excellent management, stable ownership and a shot at the cup every season.
Agreed, but when they have all that in place there is no denying that the lesser tax pressure helps them to keep the band together. Just look at all the team friendly deals that Tampa was able to get there players to sign. So even if the tax situation shouldn't be exaggerated, it shouldn't be ignored either.
 
Also necessitates mail in voting which is very sketchy.
It actually not. I don't know how other states do it but in California it's very safe. Every ballot has its own bar code. So if you mail in more than one ballot or you mail one & vote in person with another ballot, they only count the latest one & the others are invalidated. Also you have to sign your ballot & your signature has to match the one from when you registered. Which is why signing your name is better than producing ID. A person can get a fake ID but they can't reproduce someone else's signature. There's also a system called Ballot Trax that emails you when you get your ballot, when it's received, & when the vote is counted. I've voted by mail even before 2020 & I wouldn't want to go back to standing in line at a polling place. The only drawback to mail-in is it might take too long getting mailed. But you can also drop it off at a city hall or county office.

Also, I think the no state tax thing is overblown as far as giving teams an advantage. But if they can figure out a system such as only counting net income I'd be fine with that. I just wouldn't want to see states lowering or eliminating state income tax to appease rich athletes or anyone. And when states have no income taxes they're either getting their revenue from somewhere else or they're not providing services for their citizens.
 
Last edited:

Now Chirping

Back
Top