2015-2016 NHL Thread

[hockeyfan1]

Phil thrills in Pittsburgh.  It's only an exhibition game, but Kessel being paired with Crosby, scored two goals against the Carolina Hurricanes.

A portent of Kessel things to come?  So far, Monsieur Crosby sure knows the passing lanes well to feed Kessel the puck at just the right time.  Good timing one might say.  Oui!

Click here for the highlights:
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/gotta-see-it-kessel-nets-two-in-penguins-debut/

 

[Kin]

I don't know how I came across this today but it is genuinely one of the least comprehensible things I've ever read. It's basically a column about David Price being a good pitcher, but somehow it's also about the Canucks' Defense and the entire point seems to be "Boy it'd be nice if the Canucks had a #1 defenseman"

http://www.theprovince.com/sports/baseball/Willes+only+Canucks+could+land+David+Price/11285240/story.html

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I don't know how I came across this today but it is genuinely one of the least comprehensible things I've ever read. It's basically a column about David Price being a good pitcher, but somehow it's also about the Canucks' Defense and the entire point seems to be "Boy it'd be nice if the Canucks had a #1 defenseman"

http://www.theprovince.com/sports/baseball/Willes+only+Canucks+could+land+David+Price/11285240/story.html

I liked how the author even admitted in the first few paragraphs that it was a crappy article premise.

 

[Kin]

I don't know how I came across this today but it is genuinely one of the least comprehensible things I've ever read. It's basically a column about David Price being a good pitcher, but somehow it's also about the Canucks' Defense and the entire point seems to be "Boy it'd be nice if the Canucks had a #1 defenseman"

http://www.theprovince.com/sports/baseball/Willes+only+Canucks+could+land+David+Price/11285240/story.html

I liked how the author even admitted in the first few paragraphs that it was a crappy article premise.

See, what I'm not sure of is if the Jays were such a big deal that he wanted to awkwardly shoe-horn them into something about the Canucks or if BC sports fans can't deal with anyone not talking about the Canucks for more than a few paragraphs so he awkwardly shoe-horned them into something about the Blue Jays.

 

[Beowulf]

To be honest, when the Jays acquired Price the very first thing I thought of was "Man, this is like the Canucks finally getting that #1 dman". So I totally get where that columnist is coming from. Great article.

 

[Bullfrog]

To be honest, when the Jays acquired Price the very first thing I thought of was "Man, this is like the Canucks finally getting that #1 dman". So I totally get where that columnist is coming from. Great article.

You wrote it, didn't you?

 

[Kin]

There was some more expansion stuff yesterday. Nothing new, really, but the press conference is maybe worth a watch for two highlights:

1. Around half a dozen french reporters asking what was more or less the exact same question.

2. Bettman saying the expansion fee will be at least 500 million

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=781005&navid=nhl:topheads

I still think the League only approves Vegas.

 

[bustaheims]

There was some more expansion stuff yesterday. Nothing new, really, but the press conference is maybe worth a watch for two highlights:

1. Around half a dozen french reporters asking what was more or less the exact same question.

2. Bettman saying the expansion fee will be at least 500 million

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=781005&navid=nhl:topheads

I still think the League only approves Vegas.

Maybe. I think the expansion fee is an indication that the league isn't super enthused about expanding at this time. I don't think they felt anyone would actually come up with that kind of money for an NHL team. I still think there's a chance they go with no teams.

 

[Kin]

Maybe. I think the expansion fee is an indication that the league isn't super enthused about expanding at this time. I don't think they felt anyone would actually come up with that kind of money for an NHL team. I still think there's a chance they go with no teams.

No, good point. I would amend what I said to "If the NHL chooses to expand, I think they only choose Vegas".

 

[Deebo]

Maybe. I think the expansion fee is an indication that the league isn't super enthused about expanding at this time. I don't think they felt anyone would actually come up with that kind of money for an NHL team. I still think there's a chance they go with no teams.

No, good point. I would amend what I said to "If the NHL chooses to expand, I think they only choose Vegas".

Then the "Bettman hates Canada" talk will start again.

 

[bustaheims]

Maybe. I think the expansion fee is an indication that the league isn't super enthused about expanding at this time. I don't think they felt anyone would actually come up with that kind of money for an NHL team. I still think there's a chance they go with no teams.

No, good point. I would amend what I said to "If the NHL chooses to expand, I think they only choose Vegas".

Then the "Bettman hates Canada" talk will start again.

Of course it will, because people still don't really get that Bettman's not the one making the decisions.

 

[Kin]

Then the "Bettman hates Canada" talk will start again.

Sure. You could see the groundwork for that being laid by the question that got asked over and over. There really does seem to be a group of people who somehow, after all this time, still don't think that:

A) The NHL knows that a team in Canada will draw relatively well
B) Despite the above, the NHL is primarily concerned with other revenue streams.

 

[Peter D.]

Of course it will, because people still don't really get that Bettman's not the one making the decisions.

If that's the case, and it is left solely up to the owners, I have a hard time believing the required majority will pass up on half a billion dollars.

 

[Kin]

Of course it will, because people still don't really get that Bettman's not the one making the decisions.

If that's the case, and it is left solely up to the owners, I have a hard time believing the required majority will pass up on half a billion dollars.

500 million dollars divided by 30 teams is a one time payment of under 17 million dollars per team.

Right now, the Sportsnet deal pays the league around 430 million dollars per year. Divided by 30 teams that's about 14.4 million dolllars a year. If you divide that by 31 teams, it's about 13.9 million a year. So right off the bat, just looking at the Sportsnet deal, a new team would take five million dollars off of what each team would get from the TV deal over it's course.

So now you're down to an immediate benefit of about 12 million dollars per team. That would probably be shaved down further when you figure in other split pots like the NBC deal, World Cups, Merchandise, etc, etc.

So it's really not a massive windfall either way.

 

[Frank E]

Of course it will, because people still don't really get that Bettman's not the one making the decisions.

If that's the case, and it is left solely up to the owners, I have a hard time believing the required majority will pass up on half a billion dollars.

500 million dollars divided by 30 teams is a one time payment of under 17 million dollars per team.

Right now, the Sportsnet deal pays the league around 430 million dollars per year. Divided by 30 teams that's about 14.4 million dolllars a year. If you divide that by 31 teams, it's about 13.9 million a year. So right off the bat, just looking at the Sportsnet deal, a new team would take five million dollars off of what each team would get from the TV deal over it's course.

So now you're down to an immediate benefit of about 12 million dollars per team. That would probably be shaved down further when you figure in other split pots like the NBC deal, World Cups, Merchandise, etc, etc.

So it's really not a massive windfall either way.

I'd think that TV for those games would add revenue, and therefore be in addition to the $430m.

 

[Deebo]

I'd think that TV for those games would add revenue, and therefore be in addition to the $430m.

The rights deal is signed, I don't think the fee changes based on how much revenue Rogers generates

 

[Kin]

I'd think that TV for those games would add revenue, and therefore be in addition to the $430m.

The Sportsnet deal is what it is. It doesn't increase if more teams come in to the league.

They'd be able to sign a new local deal but local deals aren't split among thirty teams.

 

[bustaheims]

Of course it will, because people still don't really get that Bettman's not the one making the decisions.

If that's the case, and it is left solely up to the owners, I have a hard time believing the required majority will pass up on half a billion dollars.

In addition to the issues Nik points out, the BoG will undoubted be very concerned about the viability of these teams. They have to consider what sort of impact that the potential for these teams to need to revenue sharing handouts could dig into their bottom line, and I also imagine they're very wary of any new team becoming a Phoenix/Florida/Atlanta type situation that could leave the league with another potential revenue blackhole/albatross to deal with. It's easy to say "there's no way these guys will turn down a billion dollars," but, really, it's actually $33.3M per team. Despite some of the tactics they've chosen with their hockey teams, most of the owners have pretty solid business acumens and can look past the initial windfall to see the bigger picture - and there's a very real chance they won't like what they see.

 

[Deebo]

Are expansion fees HRR?

 

[Kin]

Are expansion fees HRR?

Nope. That goes straight to the assorted Mr. Burns' and Scrooge McDucks in ownership.