Does the NHL have a Canadian success problem?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by curves2000

I also wonder sometimes if the differences between Canadian's comfort level with living in the US and am American's living in Canada may also play a small role.

I generally find that a lot of Canadians are more comfortable with American culture, values, politics, currency, rules/laws and customs etc. We know more about their news, tv shows, companies/ corporations. I don't find a lot of Canadian's think of living in the US as "foreign" as much. A lot of people have traveled there a lot, have vacation homes and are generally more comfortable.

I do find that American's look at Canada as a lot more of a foreign country. Not adapting as well, wondering why this and that is the way it is.

I have seen it first hands with friends who have brought wives and girlfriends here and some of the struggles. Year's later trying to figure out the metric system, how much the currency is worth, why Canadian Amazon isn't as good.

It's not everybody but it has to be enough people. I recall a podcast where former Flame Brandon Bollig talked about his time in Calgary. Had a very positive experience overall and attributed "living in foreign country" as checking off something of a bucket list.

I just don't ever recall any sort of Canadian player ever really describe the USA as really foreign.

Maybe I am overthinking this

I don't think you are wrong, and I think it is emphasized more in some regions of the U.S. Take Conroy for example. He is American from New York state, but he was close enough to Canada that he spent a lot of time in the Ottawa area as a kid, playing in youth hockey tournaments and just for fun. It was the largest big city to where he lived. I seem to recall that he grew up as a Habs fan as well. When people point to him as an example of an American who ended up settling in Canada, it's important to remember that he was already practically honorary Canadian.

As hockey continues to grow in the south, we are going to see more and more players avoid Canada as they are further away from the gravity. On the flipside, the gravity of the U.S. is almost inescapable to Canadians. Their country is totally familiar to us because the culture is exposed to us daily.

[Flames_Gimp]

i think being a young famous millionaire and not wanting this crappy climate plays a role. If you're a millionaire and you can go anywhere and do anything would you pick edmonton, winnipeg etc?

aside from vancouver and toronto to some extent, Canada isn't the best place for that lifestyle, but I have no idea what being filthy rich is like so I am very presumptuous.

Personally if i won the lotto i'd be down in Florida or the carribean that day, only thing better is healthcare and when you're rich I can't imagine that being much of a concern

[Flame On]

As always I think more than one thing is possible at once. I think there is an awful lot of mismanagement by Canadian franchises. But also, there's a real anchor contributing to the chances of success by how lucrative and advantaged other markets are when it comes to things like free agency. So sometimes a Canadian team won't even get a shot at someone, or they have to overpay, meaning their depth is potentially minimized.
And how many of the times do they have to go "all-in" because they know player x will automatically leave, due to better tax situation, better weather, etc. etc.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Flame On

As always I think more than one thing is possible at once. I think there is an awful lot of mismanagement by Canadian franchises. But also, there's a real anchor contributing to the chances of success by how lucrative and advantaged other markets are when it comes to things like free agency. So sometimes a Canadian team won't even get a shot at someone, or they have to overpay, meaning their depth is potentially minimized.
And how many of the times do they have to go "all-in" because they no player x will automatically leave due to better tax situation, better weather, etc. etc.

Or, they draft as well as possible but can't keep the players once they are in their primes. I heard that happened to a Canadian team recently. You're right though, that was a combination of mismanagement and the Canadian factor on top of that.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

The point is, if you have an opportunity to win in game 7 of the Finals it's hard to blame anything structural for the lack of cups.

Sure, if you look at any one game 7 in isolation. But if they're NEVER winning it, that begs a different question.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Sure, if you look at any one game 7 in isolation. But if they're NEVER winning it, that begs a different question.

I don't really think so. But what I will admit is that the finals appearances were more fluke than anything. None of those teams were powerhouses. and it showed by the way they disappeared right away. Calgary had a good year the next season but declined in a hurry.

[Enoch Root]

And, as has been pointed out, the 7 appearances is less than half of what would be expected, statistically. Few appearances, all failures, no repeats (power houses)

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by Bonded

I don’t know. I think it is bad management at the Canadian level. Similar to the Rangers, they try and stay competitive with UFAs. Calgary had the best set up to rebuild for any team in years and instead committed big contracts to three older players. Kadri had other offers than Calgary.

The only reason we had this rebuild opportunity is because our contention window was slammed shut because we’re a small market Canadian team. This team should currently have Gaudreau, Tkachuk, and Fox - possibly Mark Stone. That’s a contender.

[Five-hole]

Originally Posted by Flames_Gimp

i think being a young famous millionaire and not wanting this crappy climate plays a role. If you're a millionaire and you can go anywhere and do anything would you pick edmonton, winnipeg etc?

aside from vancouver and toronto to some extent, Canada isn't the best place for that lifestyle, but I have no idea what being filthy rich is like so I am very presumptuous.

Personally if i won the lotto i'd be down in Florida or the carribean that day, only thing better is healthcare and when you're rich I can't imagine that being much of a concern

There's a very legitimate argument that Canada is a better place to raise a family. Maybe not for the very wealthy, but it's a relatively small portion of NHLers who really fall into the ultra rich camp where living in a Miami or NYC wouldn't be a barrier to having everything you need for your kids at a wealthy-level lifestyle.

So your Auston Matthews of the world aren't going to come to Calgary, but that's not a legitimate issue in the first place. We either draft that kind of player or never get him. It's the mid- to upper-mid tier UFAs that are really in contention here and we have been able to get some of those guys (namely Markstrom).

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by VilleN

The only reason we had this rebuild opportunity is because our contention window was slammed shut because we’re a small market Canadian team. This team should currently have Gaudreau, Tkachuk, and Fox - possibly Mark Stone. That’s a contender.

It's hard to conceive of a way to force Fox or Stone to sign here. You can make it harder on Fox through tinkering with the college UFA rules but ultimately if he wants NYC badly enough (and he's good enough for them to want him) he will play there. And Stone wasn't even a product of CBA rules - he had no NTC which prevented him being traded here. He just refused to discuss an extension with the Flames, whereas he was ready to do that in a second with Vegas.

The main things I think you can do are to (a) tighten NTC allowances; (b) adjust the salary cap for taxes; and (c) change RFA rules to extend control to the drafting teams. The Union will like the second one I think but fight hard on the other two.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

As identified in this thread the Canadian teams all have a problem with the patience required to build a NHL team. Most every championship in recent memory came out of the teams being awful for an extended period of time but also allowing young players to make mistakes and to grow.

Every city has media outlets that are expecting every first round draft pick to enter the league in their first year and have no mistakes. The pressure is on from the first game and when dealing with 18 to 20 year old kids that can be daunting. Every Canadian market has their Eric Francis like reporters who are all but willing to create controversy for clicks and ruin their confidence in the process.

From 1995 through 2006 the majority of Canadian teams were unable to pay the large salaries that players were demanding with a weak dollar and were feeder teams for the larger markets. The teams were having to do season ticket drives so that the teams didn’t leave, it is hard to justify paying larger salaries when they could barely afford to keep the lights on. The impact of that was felt for close to a decade.

I also think that the bigger teams could afford more scouts and had a bit of an advantage relative to clubs like the Flames who had fewer scouts. This lead to worse drafting for a period of time. Same thing when you have a shoestring budget you don’t have the larger nets to find some of the diamonds in the rough such as Detroit managed to do.

Plus it is really, really hard for a team to win in this league with all of the cards needing to fall into place at the same time, being awful at the right time with getting the right draft picks, having players exceed expectations based on draft position, having good free agent signings and asset management, plus not having major injuries and being able to keep everything together for an extended period of time so that players grow. How in the past 20 years there have only been a handful of teams who have managed to do that. Look at Carolina they have been very good for close to a five year span and yet they haven’t managed to make it into the finals yet and that is after having all of those things as well. Since 2008 so a 15 year span only 8 different teams have managed to win the cup. That will change this year but it still shows how difficult it is to win with only St Louis, Washington and Colorado being the only one time winners (and Colorado could win more with their core obviously)

[VilleN]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It's hard to conceive of a way to force Fox or Stone to sign here. You can make it harder on Fox through tinkering with the college UFA rules but ultimately if he wants NYC badly enough (and he's good enough for them to want him) he will play there. And Stone wasn't even a product of CBA rules - he had no NTC which prevented him being traded here. He just refused to discuss an extension with the Flames, whereas he was ready to do that in a second with Vegas.

The main things I think you can do are to (a) tighten NTC allowances; (b) adjust the salary cap for taxes; and (c) change RFA rules to extend control to the drafting teams. The Union will like the second one I think but fight hard on the other two.

Yeah, I don't think there is a way to completely fix it - but I think it would be nice to see some mitigation measures as you outlined. At the end of the day Calgary will never be a New York, Chicago, Vegas, LA, etc.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

As identified in this thread the Canadian teams all have a problem with the patience required to build a NHL team. Most every championship in recent memory came out of the teams being awful for an extended period of time but also allowing young players to make mistakes and to grow.

Every city has media outlets that are expecting every first round draft pick to enter the league in their first year and have no mistakes. The pressure is on from the first game and when dealing with 18 to 20 year old kids that can be daunting. Every Canadian market has their Eric Francis like reporters who are all but willing to create controversy for clicks and ruin their confidence in the process.

From 1995 through 2006 the majority of Canadian teams were unable to pay the large salaries that players were demanding with a weak dollar and were feeder teams for the larger markets. The teams were having to do season ticket drives so that the teams didn’t leave, it is hard to justify paying larger salaries when they could barely afford to keep the lights on. The impact of that was felt for close to a decade.

I also think that the bigger teams could afford more scouts and had a bit of an advantage relative to clubs like the Flames who had fewer scouts. This lead to worse drafting for a period of time. Same thing when you have a shoestring budget you don’t have the larger nets to find some of the diamonds in the rough such as Detroit managed to do.

Plus it is really, really hard for a team to win in this league with all of the cards needing to fall into place at the same time, being awful at the right time with getting the right draft picks, having players exceed expectations based on draft position, having good free agent signings and asset management, plus not having major injuries and being able to keep everything together for an extended period of time so that players grow. How in the past 20 years there have only been a handful of teams who have managed to do that. Look at Carolina they have been very good for close to a five year span and yet they haven’t managed to make it into the finals yet and that is after having all of those things as well. Since 2008 so a 15 year span only 8 different teams have managed to win the cup. That will change this year but it still shows how difficult it is to win with only St Louis, Washington and Colorado being the only one time winners (and Colorado could win more with their core obviously)

[DiracSpike]

You can nitpick micro examples of Canadian teams not being run 100% right 100% of the time but that's immaterial. There's not some systemic reason Canadian teams would be run improperly. Zooming out to the macro picture the situation is pretty clear, a Canadian team not winning the cup in 30 years is a complete statistical anomaly that can't be explained by bad luck or perceived poor management. A Canadian team should win every 4 years and be in the finals every two years. Instead it's been 30 years for a win and besides the wonky corona year it's been 12 since a team was even in the finals. It's also no coincidence that the last Canadian team win in the early 90's was the same time as the NHL's aggressive expansion push into almost exclusively warm weather low tax US states that previously had no teams.

The multi-decade evidence is in, Canadian teams can't compete. The lack of big cities, terrible weather, overbearing fans, and high taxes puts them at an extreme disadvantage. This year again shows that, final four teams are all warm weather, no state-tax cities. If I'm a Canadian team owner I'm going to the commissioner and saying there needs to be special exemptions for Canadian teams in the next CBA. It's either that or watching another decade go by of the same results.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

The multi-decade evidence is in, Canadian teams can't compete. The lack of big cities, terrible weather, overbearing fans, and high taxes puts them at an extreme disadvantage. This year again shows that, final four teams are all warm weather, no state-tax cities. If I'm a Canadian team owner I'm going to the commissioner and saying there needs to be special exemptions for Canadian teams in the next CBA. It's either that or watching another decade go by of the same results.

What kind of special exemptions were thinking? Like a cap relief due to the fact that Canadian teams have to pay players more to play here?

I'll harp on the contract clause situation until I am blue in the face, because I think it is one of the biggest issues and the way the NHL implements it compared to other leagues is unreasonable, especially considering how many teams there are in Canada. It's crazy to me that in a league where 22% of the teams are in Canada, the CBA allows for all players with very few restrictions, to have contract clauses that prevent them from playing for Canadian clubs. If the opposite was true and players were refusing to be traded to American markets, I am sure the NHL would have changed it already.

[1qqaaz]

This honestly doesn't sound too promising for Zadorov re-signing:

"How did your family settle down in Canada? Ilya Samsonov said that in Canada the food is better, and in general it is more comfortable to live than in the USA. How about for you?

Zadorov: We like America better. Initially, in the NHL , I played in American teams. Calgary is still a provincial city. My wife and I are from Moscow, we were born in a metropolis, we love the metropolis. We spend the summer in Miami, this is the perfect place for us - we love the heat. We like everything about Calgary, it's a good city to live in, but the only thing is that it's very cold. In winter it can be -35, -40 degrees. I don't even want to leave the house. This has never happened in Moscow."

He then goes on to say that he actually lives in Miami. Seems like he agrees with Tkachuk.

[Bandwagon Surfer]

Originally Posted by VilleN

I don't see how it can possibly be mismanagement across the board for Canadian teams over the past 30 years. And if it is, it's likely due to the same market issue we have for players. Simply put, most Canadian markets are less desirable for players, coaches, and management positions. Canadian markets rarely get the big free agent signings, I've never heard of a player refusing to sign in a bigger American market so he can play in Canada... the reverse happens very frequently. There is a clear handicap for Canadian teams, and IMO it accounts for the lack of success. It is hard enough to build a winner, you need a lot to go right and often times Canadian teams (especially the smaller market ones) have the deck stacked against them.

Edit: Let's take Vegas - Mark Stone and Jack Eichel are there because they wanted to be there. Would they have made it to the WCF without those two players? Unlikely. Might Edmonton be there instead? - or maybe they don't make the playoffs at all and Calgary squeaks in.

I don't think it is 30 years of poor management across the board, I see it more as bad management combined with bad luck.

Bad management has severely limited the number of Canadian teams who are competitive, then bad luck has kept the well managed teams from the cup. Winning 0 times in 7 finals appearances is the bad luck coloring this discussion. If one or two of those ended differently, the whole discussion would be different.


I see things like free agent signings as a non-factor too. Well more that they are not the driving force behind why winning teams win. Free agent signings, especially big name free agents, turn out to hurt teams as much as they help. Even looking at teams like the Rangers who have an amazing city and all the money in the world, I see their successes following how good their management is. A lot of the Ranger's bad years have come from signing free agents they shouldn't have.


To me, why Canadian teams have spent so many years with bad management is the core question. My guess is that it is too strong of a hockey tradition has left teams unable to adapt to the modern nhl.

With only 7 teams it would be interesting to look at the last 30 years for each, grade when we think their management was good/bad, and look at the reasons why. I bet there will not be many years where there is good management but lack of success due to lack of free agent signings. But this post is already too long, and I am lazy.

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

This honestly doesn't sound too promising for Zadorov re-signing:

"How did your family settle down in Canada? Ilya Samsonov said that in Canada the food is better, and in general it is more comfortable to live than in the USA. How about for you?

Zadorov: We like America better. Initially, in the NHL , I played in American teams. Calgary is still a provincial city. My wife and I are from Moscow, we were born in a metropolis, we love the metropolis. We spend the summer in Miami, this is the perfect place for us - we love the heat. We like everything about Calgary, it's a good city to live in, but the only thing is that it's very cold. In winter it can be -35, -40 degrees. I don't even want to leave the house. This has never happened in Moscow."

He then goes on to say that he actually lives in Miami. Seems like he agrees with Tkachuk.

Honestly I don’t blame the guy. I work outside and jumped at a good opportunity on Vancouver island to get away from that weather. When you have his kind of options I get it.

Really surprised how quickly he re-signed and for the price with what Gudbranson got.

[bucksmasher]

Fix the tax advantage problem so players aren't penalized financially to play here and we'll start winning cups

[N-E-B]

Canada has a Canada problem.

We all love Calgary here. Most of us live here and were raised here. But put yourself in someone else’s shoes. If you worked for a company that had headquarters in 32 different cities and you could work making millions in Miami, Nashville, Tampa Bay, Los Angeles, New York, Phoenix, or Winnipeg where are you choosing to work? I’m willing to bet Winnipeg isn’t the answer.

The reality is that Canada is not attractive to most players when there’s southern US markets on the table. We have to overpay to get guys to be here. And not just in free agency either. The Flames basically had to pay Gaudreau $1,000,000 to play one game just to get him to sign here out of college.

Canada isn’t an attractive market and we’re at an inherent disadvantage because of it. A good agent can work around the tax issues. They can’t work around a rabid fanbase, hypercritical media, and -30 winters.