NHL Morning Coffee Headlines – July 24, 2024
The latest on the Flyers’ Sean Couturier, the Penguins’ Kevin Hayes, and the Jets’ Cole Perfetti, some arbitration dates are revealed, and more in today’s NHL Morning Coffee Headlines.
THE HOCKEY NEWS: Philadelphia Flyers captain Sean Couturier faces a make-or-break season. The 31-year-old Flyers captain played a full season in 2023-24 after missing a season and a half to back surgery but struggled to regain his form, finishing with 38 points in 74 games. Couturier was also a healthy scratch late in the season.

Philadelphia Flyers center Sean Couturier (NHL Images).
SPECTOR’S NOTE: It can sometimes take a full season for a player to bounce back from a serious surgery. Couturier could return to his Selke Trophy form this season and silence the concerns about his future. His contract is partly behind those worries, entering the third season of an eight-year deal with an average annual value of $7.75 million.
PITTSBURGH HOCKEY NOW: Penguins forward Kevin Hayes intends to use his trade from the St. Louis Blues as motivation while he awaits his role with his new club. Hayes, 32, said he didn’t really find a role with the Blues, making it difficult to play his best hockey.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: The Penguins acquired Hayes to replace the aging Jeff Carter as their third-line center, which was greeted with criticism citing Hayes’ age and struggles last season with the Blues. How well he adjusts will contribute to the outcome of the Penguins’ season.
WINNIPEG SUN: Cole Perfetti’s role this season with the Jets could determine the length of his next contract. The 22-year-old restricted free-agent forward is believed to have talked with new head coach Scott Arniel regarding his role with the team, which could sway whether he signs a long-term deal. Perfetti could see top-six minutes and power-play time under Arniel.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: Former Jets head coach Rick Bowness seemed to lose confidence in Perfetti last season. He could break out this season with a more robust role under Arniel.
PUCKPEDIA: released the salary arbitration dates for Buffalo Sabres goaltender Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen (July 29), Columbus Blue Jackets forward Kirill Marchenko (July 31), New York Islanders forward Oliver Wahlstrom (Aug. 1) and Carolina Hurricanes winger Martin Necas (Aug. 4).
New York Rangers defenseman Ryan Lindgren also has an upcoming arbitration hearing date.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: The Athletic’s Arthur Staple recently reported Lindgren’s hearing is scheduled for Aug. 2.
TORONTO SUN: The Maple Leafs avoided arbitration with forward Connor Dewar as the two sides agreed to a one-year, $1.18 million contract.
BUFFALO HOCKEY NOW: The Buffalo Sabres won’t be facing Beck Malenstyn in arbitration, signing the 26-year-old winger to a two-year contract with an average annual value of $1.35 million.
NHL.COM: The Utah Hockey Club signed Cole Beaudoin to a three-year entry-level contract. Beaudoin, 18, was selected 24th overall by Utah in the 2024 NHL Draft.
TSN: Penguins general manager Kyle Dubas and Tampa Bay Lightning GM Julien BriseBois were named to Canada’s management team for the 4 Nations Face-Off in February and the 2026 Men’s Olympic hockey team.
THE ATHLETIC: A tax ruling involving Toronto Maple Leafs captain John Tavares could make it difficult for Canadian NHL teams to sign free agents.
The report indicates a key reason behind Tavares’ signing with the Leafs was the belief a provision in the Canada-US Tax Treaty commonly used by professional athletes would allow him to pay lower taxes on his initial $15 million signing bonus.
However, the Canada Revenue Agency claims he owes over $6.8 million (plus another $1.2 million in interest) on that signing bonus. Tavares is disputing the CRA’s assessment, the outcome of which could have a far-reaching effect on Canadian teams trying to lure players north of the border.
This stems from where Tavares’ principal residence was in 2018. He was a US tax resident that year. However, a person is considered a resident of Canada for tax purposes if they spend 183 days in the country.
The issue centers on whether Tavares’s bonus with the Leafs that year was employment income or an inducement to sign the contract. If the CRA is successful, it will reframe how the provision of bonuses is applied.
The CRA is also scrutinizing the use of Retirement Compensation Agreements (RCAs) by Canadian teams to reduce the tax burden on non-resident players.
SPECTOR’S NOTE: I’ve shortened this to provide the main highlights. If you have a subscription to The Athletic, I recommend reading the piece for the full details. This case could take a couple of years before a decision is reached.
Higher taxes are one reason why Canadian teams have had difficulty signing top free-agent talent. A ruling against Tavares will mean those clubs must pay more to entice free agents to sign with them. It will also mean they must pay more to retain their best players.
Canadian teams will likely turn to the NHL to address this situation If this becomes a significant impediment for them. They’re unlikely to go to the Canadian government. An attempt to find a federal and provincial solution to help those clubs dealing with a historically low Canadian dollar in 1999 didn’t poll well with Canadians. It was abandoned following disagreements between the provinces and the federal government over the breakdown of the funding.
That forced the NHL to implement a revenue-sharing scheme for Canadian teams which stayed in place until the 2005 CBA was implemented.
The taxes, playoff cap are hobby horses for chronic complainers.
It isn’t owners, GMs , agents and NHLPA complaining.
Some of the NHL biggest stars sign and re-sign in Canada., Matthews, McDavid
Of The Top 10 players in the NHL, 1 came from Florida. 1 came from TB, 2 from Edmonton, 3 from Colorado, 1 Pittsburgh and 1 from Boston.1 from Toronto.
Florida, Tampa Bay, Nashville, Dallas and Seattle aren’t exactly loaded with big name players .
Decisions are made on more than taxation.
The decision in the CRA case might impact the future if the CRA wins, a big if.
In other words, shut up and be patriotic and pay the over-burdensome taxes.
This case might greatly affect Draisaitl and his next contract! And on top of that the NHL has the “parity tax” (escrow) on everyone’s earnings!
Overburdensome taxes? What are you referring to, Johnny?
The Higher than necessary taxes in Toronto, Montreal and other Canadian markets, as well as teams in CA, NY, NJ, Chicago and to a lesser extent, MA, MI and CO. They have all been Bambie’d about here.
“Higher than necessary taxes in Toronto, Montreal, and other Canadian markets”.
What are those specifically, Johnny? And how do they burdensome to wealthy NHL players such as John Tavares? Bear in mind that this issue with Tavares deals with federal taxes, not provincial or municipal.
Did I read that right? 8 of the 15 million signing bonus was owed in taxes?
No, over $6 million was, the rest is interest.
The highest federal income tax bracket is Canada is 33%. The highest federal income tax bracket in the USA is 37%.
The difference is the state tax and the provincial tax.
In Canada the provinces carry the primary burden for health care, which is the highest cost by a lot, as well with some other responsibilities.
Not sure folks want to start debating the value of universal healthcare or other spending programs on a hockey site. US and Canada both spend money wisely, and often unwisely. How about we leave it at that.
Debating tax policy based on NHL salaries and the cap, doesn’t make much sense either IMO. Accommodating taxes for NHL players ain’t gonna fly, nor should it.
Changing the cap rules to accommodate kinda makes sense to me though.
It has to be an advantage, the only question is how big of one? HF30 is right it isn’t as important to some players as others, but it will matter to some. I’m thinking it matters more to the guys who make less, kinda the mid tier guys, where $500K a year for 5 years, makes a huge difference vs the guys who will earn close to $100M in their careers.
Changing the cap rule to accommodate the tax issue is reportedly something the NHL doesn’t want to deal with right now. It will be complicated because, as The Athletic’s Eric Duhatschek reported, they’ll have to deal with the 18 different state tax laws, five Canadian provinces, and the District of Columbia. And that, folks, will make things very complicated.
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5641099/2024/07/19/nhl-no-income-tax-states/
Holy smokes! What signing bonus? I’d be livid if I was Tavares. I’m pooling for him to win his case.
I’ll make a minor point without getting into how little sympathy I have for the wealthy who whine about taxes despite having much, much more than anyone could ever need.
And that is that while higher taxes are always said to exist in CA, no one appears to know that some supposedly low tax states such as TX have much higher property tax rates than are paid in CA. So if you want to be a homeowner, the actual amount you end up paying in taxes will vary only marginally if at all whether you live in Texas or California. I use these states as an example as I have family in both.
Money is usually the most important factor. If a player like tkachuk can take home the same amount of money with a 3 million less gross pay then signing in Montreal it’s a huge advantage. You save a few million here and there in space it gives you substantial advantage. Using the leafs core 4 as an example Florida can pay Matthew’s 10.5, Marner 9, Nylander 9.5 and Tavares 9.5 and they would all still take home the same money.You save about 8 million there alone. Could get you another high end player. Imagine how much Kucherov, Point, Stamkos and Herman plus don’t forget the goalie would cost in Montreal. Although safe to say we already know what a top goalie cost in Montreal. The to STANLEY CUP winning goalie in Tampa cost 9.5
That advantage only works if you have a well-managed team like the Lightning. Even then, the salary cap catches up with them, as we’ve seen over the past three years as their depth was depleted by cost-cutting deals. Remember, the Panthers had the same tax advantage as the Lightning but they were a laughingstock for decades until they finally brought in a shrewd general manager in Bill Zito.
I think one point which is the “equalizer” has been overlooked here. Teams can and will be able to offer any amount including more than a tax free state take home.* I hope you noticed that asterisk.
Looking at what’s at stake here teams “not going to the government” for a solution but rather to the league might be because Canadian teams will need the league do something, if and when needed, so they can remain competitive when it comes to signing and retaining UFAs who could otherwise receive an offer where your cap hit is a lower percentage against the team’s cap but your actual take home is a higher percentage or amount than if you played anywhere in Canada.
For years we have seen big dollar contracts given to players on Canadian teams that were overpayments by one or two million on average. Some was exchange rate, some cost of living, but some has to with the imbalance of taxes.
Also, that 183 day thing might also be an “equalizer” since this seems to only affect any player making Canada their homes.
I don’t know but all this doesn’t bode well.
Depending on what happens with Tavares case. If he wins, this becomes a nothingburger. If he loses, those Canadian teams will need to coordinate with the NHL and NHLPA to figure something out in the CBA to address the issue if it becomes a real problem for them.
Let the high tax jurisdictions suffer, I mean profit from their decisions.
No amending or balancing should be done by the league.
If the residents want high taxes, and vote for that legislation, let them reap the benefits of their stupidities, I mean decision.
Yeah, right – imagine the stupidity of me paying those asinine taxes all my adult life … but, then again, now that my wife needs constant care for her dementia, the taxes that pay for her health care is going to come in handy … hmmm … maybe I’m not so stupid.
Go away, twit.
😵💫😵💫😵💫…🤯
Rare indeed is the player who is not interested in salary. I’d argue they don’t exist. How many examples are there of players taking a home town discount?
Most players careers are less than a decade, meaning there is, what, 30 years, before their NHL pension kicks in. That’s 30 years of savings to burn through, and none make the same $ post retirement.
What have elite players started to do? Sign short-term contracts of around 4 years, so when they hit their prime, they can sign for as much money as possible. Witness Matthews and Nylander.
In previous exchanges on the advantage non-tax states, rebuttals here included tax mitigation strategies provided by Allan Walsh. Now two significant strategies are in question.
If money wasn’t important, why would agents be explaining these advantages to their players?
Ray andLyle: Do you not think 6 million is important to Tavares, irrespective of his career earnings?
True, the tax decisions are not in yet. But to suggest that such decisions are “a big if” in terms of outcome and potential impact, is absurd. It’s a live issue with massive consequences.
One being watched like a hawk by players and their agents. Until resolved it will be yet one more impediment to players and their no trade list.
LJ, where did I say the $6 million isn’t important to Tavares irrespective of his career earnings?
For that matter, where did I say that the tax issue doesn’t have consequences?
Nevertheless, the tax decision remains a big “what if”. Once the decision is in and if they go the CRA’s way, we don’t know for certain what the impact will be or what the NHL will do. Odds are they won’t be proactive to address it because they never are.
It will require prodding from the Canadian teams. They could consider it a significant issue or shrug it off because, let’s face it, most team owners also don’t have the best history when it comes to being farsighted. Perhaps it doesn’t adversely affect their efforts of signing players any more than their location. We can guess but we still don’t know for sure. So many other factors come into play here, like a rising salary cap that could offset that issue.
The tax issue is also obviously factored in when agents talk to the players about where to sign. It could be a major issue or perhaps one that isn’t as bad as feared. Lower taxes isn’t the end-all, be-all when a player decides where they’ll play. It’s just one issue that determines where they’ll go.
LJ, $6M matters to everyone! Can’t argue that.
But I have a question that maybe you can answer as I am not a subscriber to the Athletic. It isn’t like Tavares wouldn’t have to pay federal taxes in the USA if he would have signed in NY, FLA or wherever. He would have to right?
So, in case I am missing something the issue with the cap and taxes isn’t about the $6M he owes to the Canadian feds, it is what would the difference between what he would have paid in the USA vs Canada?
Again, the highest federal income tax bracket pays 33% in Canada and 37% in the USA. Also is the $6M in CDN$ or US$?
So if we are going compare, we need all the details. Did that get mentioned in the article? Last I checked NHL players still have to pay taxes in both countries.
Lyle:
My comment was in response to your post as follows:
” ‘Higher than necessary taxes in Toronto, Montreal, and other Canadian markets”.
What are those specifically, Johnny? And how do they burdensome to wealthy NHL players such as John Tavares?”
It seems clear to me you are saying it isn’t a burden to Tavares. If not then why did you phrase it that way? Because a 6 million hit is surely burdensome to him.
Again: I have never said that tax issues/take home pay are the only significances that motivates a player, that it is the be all and the end all.
But is anyone going to argue that for the great majority of players money and term are the most important issues?
Citing other motivations is fair comment but it doesn’t diminish their importance.
LJ, you misunderstood that post. It was in reply to a Johnny Z rant about higher taxes. I was asking him to be specific about what taxes he deemed “higher than necessary” and how they would be burdensome to Tavares. I was in no way shrugging off the tax bill he was battling with the CRA.
Ok, thanks, maybe my misread Lyle.
The Pen’s aren’t going to pay Crosby. Hayes was brought in to replace him. 🤫😳😂
Sure
Kick us when we’re down
😭
I understand stand that Lyle but you can definitely have a management advantage when you have more to spend. Don’t kid yourself the gm’s of those teams use that in there pitch for the players to sign for less. Hey Kucherov I know you can get 12 million with another team but you can clear the same amount if we pay you 9.5 million and we can use the other 2.5 to bring in more talent to have a better chance to win the cup. HUGE advantage. It’s not what you make it’s what you take home that matters. You say Tampa lost a bunch of there players because of the cap. Imagine the players Tampa would have lost had they been a tax state. They are still up against the cap and they have no player making over 10 million even though they have at least 4 players that would make that on the open market.
Yes, a team can have an advantage with no state tax, provided they have the smart management to work it to their advantage. In the Lightning’s case, it was by drafting and developing their core players. In the Panthers case, it was by hiring a savvy GM who made shrewd, aggressive trades that built up the core. Even then, that advantage will be short-lived as the salary cap catches up to them.
The “tax advantage” only became an issue because the Florida Panthers became a Cup contender after decades in the wilderness. It’s been around for years but only now is it an issue and is by no means a certainty of success. Meanwhile, teams in other places with much higher taxes since the Lightning and Panthers came along over 30 years ago built Cup contenders and champions (Pittsburgh, Chicago, Boston, Washington, Los Angeles, Colorado, New Jersey, Detroit) over that period without those advantages.
Lyle you obviously have to manage the team well to win a cup and a tax advantage doesn’t guarantee anything. The point I’m trying to make is that it’s much easier to retain your core players and build a better team around them when you can diminish the cap hits of those players. When you literally have millions of extra cap space dollars to use because you can sign players for less, it’s a huge advantage. Using the leafs as an example just the savings from there core 4 could get them a top goalie. It’s what Tampa did. Stamkos was offered 11 but was content to stay with Tampa (which he loves) because the take home pay was basically the same. Do you think Stamkos says I’ll throw away 3 million per year in take home pay just because I like playing in Tampa. We’re talking 24 million over 8 years. Even now he signed in a no tax state. Kucherov is the top winger in the game he would have easily gotten 11 plus on the open market when he signed. Vaslevsky won the cup signed for 9.5. What could a team like the leafs or Montreal do with an extra 10 million or so to spend.
What the heck: Yes, Tampa had an advantage in retaining their core players, but that advantage is soon diminished by the salary cap. It cost valuable depth players over the past three years, to the point where they were no longer considered a Cup contender, and this year it cost them their captain. At some point, it comes home to roost.
Well, now everyone knows of the tax advantages of no-tax states. and most of those teams are now competitive as well! So, the proverbial cat is outta the bag and with that you will see these teams hold on to their competitive edge much longer as players flock to these states that make them wealthier as well! Nearly 18% inflation rate has a bearing on this as well!
Johnny, the Lightning were competitive because they drafted and developed well, with eight core players coming out of their system since 2008. However, the salary cap caught up with them and they’ve declined over the last two years because they were forced to deplete their roster depth in cost-cutting trades.
The Panthers were a laughingstock for decades until they hired Bill Zito four years ago. His wheeling and dealing built them into a champion, however, it cost them several players this summer including Brandon Montour. It could cost them Aaron Ekblad, Sam Bennett or Carter Verhaeghe next summer as they can’t afford to re-sign all three. So the cap is already starting to nibble, and by next summer the bite becomes bigger.
The Golden Knights were competitive out of the gate because their management outsmarted several of their rivals to land quality talent, then traded away draft picks and prospects for immediate help. It maintained them as a contender but the bill started coming due this summer with the loss of Marchessault and Stephenson. Theodore could be next to go next summer.
The Predators peaked in 2017 and 2018, and have declined since. Yes, the no-tax state helped them land Stamkos, Marchessault and Skjei, but those signings are not certainty of Cup contention. Meanwhile, the Kraken continue to go through their growing pains. In Dallas, they’ve had their ups and downs over the last 30 years. Once again, management of roster and the cap has been the vital elements there.
Four of those six teams have been around for over 25 years. Three of them became champions over the past four, not because of their “no-tax” advantage but because they had shrewd management that was able to build and maintain contenders.
As for players “flocking” to those teams, that’s not going to happen because there are only six clubs with that advantage and they only have so many roster spots. And again, the salary cap is the great leveler here. The Lightning lost Stamkos because of it, the Golden Knights lost Marchessault and Stephenson because of it, and the Panthers lost Montour because of it.
Johnny, inflation rate in Canada is 2.5% YOY, US is 3% YOY. Both June #’s.
Inflation is similar, and has been similar, in every large free market economy in the world so thinking it doesn’t have an impact on where an NHL player signs.
This whole “debate” assumes that money is thebe all end all.
NHL players make enough money that other factors are in play too, quality of life, education, healthcare, endorsements, winning culture, stability, pressure or lack of.
Since 2000, Canadian teams have been in the SCF 5 times
Sine 2000 the “tax-free” US teams made it to the SCF 12 times, 7 in the last 4 years…..that sounds likke good present management not tax advantage.
To characterize the whole debate as just about money is false. I’ve not argued, nor have I seen anyone else argue, that players sign solely for money. To suggest otherwise is to distort the issue.
To one of your points, Draisaitl is likely to resign with the Oilers due the chance of winning the Cup.
But when he does he will be amongst the highest paid players in the league. Until he is leap frogged by others, just as he leap frogs players now.
It is beyond debate that money is highly important to players; ergo, it is beyond debate that non tax states have an advantage in contract offers.
It is what it is! The benefit in Florida is not just the taxes but the life style and weather.
Living here in Winnipeg, reportedly the team that appears most often on players no trade list. Well known in these parts that the jets may have to pay more to keep a player or to get one, just because it’s Winnipeg. All players contract are paid in US dollars.
My point is there will always be advantages and disadvantages.
Edmonton sign McDavid, Toronto sign Matthews players will stay if their being treated well and taken care of.
Re “The Penguins acquired Hayes to replace the aging Jeff Carter as their third-line center”
We can debate all we want whether Hayes was “brought in” or “pushed on”(incentivized by a 2nd) Penguins
Or whether or not he will play 3rd line center
He won’t however be replacing Carter as 3rd line Center.
Eller was 3rd line Center, Carter (with rare exceptions – injuries etc) was 4th line Center
I’ve certainly been vocal regarding this move; and continue to be upset about it but I unfortunately don’t see Dubas smartly change his mind and flip him out.
So, I’m hoping and praying for a huge turnaround (metaphorically and literally [ he MUST remember to also play in his own end]) for Hayes
Decision of where a UFA signs is many fold and milti-faceted, including but not limited to (in no particular order)
-Team/Teamates
-Coach
-playing opportunity
-Expected success of Team
-whether you are in high demand or still waiting for an offer a few weeks into UFA season
-structure of contract (does a team pretty well avoid all NMC or NTC clause requests; does this team insist all salary no Signing bonus)
-City itself (amenities, weather, social, schools [kids])
-Spouse/family concerns/considerations of where to play (e.g. Pronger’s wife; Edmonton; Trouba’s wife; NYC)
-take home pay
-possibility of extra income (ads)
-personal exposure (glass house heavy scrutiny by public [e.g. Toronto, Montreal] vs places where the average citizen could pass you on the street and not know who you are (e.g. LA)
In no way is take home pay an absolute/ultimate deciding factor or even major decision factor for all players. Some? Maybe??
There is also some tax manipulation strategies (official residence listed etc) that can mitigate/lessen a significant amount of taxes paid
That said; there are still cases where take/home pay is significant in their decision making; and therefore provides an incentive for accepting a smaller gross to play on that team
Obviously every player wants to hoist the cup
You parlay a franchise that is a cup contender, in a City with great weather, great amenities; and no negative concerns re/from family about that city; AND add a take-home pay advantage…. That will draw players and could have them accepting a lower gross to play there
Panthers, Lightning, Knights have ticked off many of those boxes lately and players have signed for less than they’d get elsewhere
Stars (final 4 ; back to back years) also checks off quite a few boxes
Dubas making any decisions or having any influence on the Canadian team selection just made my day.
U S A
U S A
U S A