The NHL Plans to Grow HRR by $1 Billion in 3 Years

1019
Gary Bettman
ajc.com

How will it happen & what does it mean for the Toronto Maple Leafs?

A. Background

In a memo released in September of this year, the Chief Operating Officer of the NHL notified all league employees of initiatives and staff changes to take effect during the 2013-2014 season. In the memo the league identified a plan to increase annual gross national revenue by $1 billion dollars by the end of three years, or in other words, in time for the 2016-2017 season. To put that type of increase in perspective, it had previously taken the league from 2005-06 to 2011-12 – or 6 years – to attain the same revenue growth. Forget linear growth, we’re talking exponential revenue growth here, folks.

The memo also outlined the league’s plans for how it will go about achieving the $1 billion dollars of revenue growth, and cited 4 key areas that will drive up national gross revenue, these areas are:

  1. Expansion of the league’s core businesses: media, licensing and sponsorship;
  2. An increased focus on “big events”, which includes 6 outdoor games during the 2013-2014 season;
  3. An increased presence in Europe, with more NHL games being played overseas, the return of the World Cup of Hockey, and a plan for a Champions Cup competition between top European and NHL clubs; and
  4. Securing a new Canadian media rights deal, to begin in 2014-2015.

If that last one sounds familiar, it’s because the NHL triumphantly ticked off box number 4 when it secured an historic $5.2 billion exclusive national media deal with Rogers.

Ok, so the NHL stands to make a whole lot more money, but what exactly does this mean to your average fan – and more importantly – your average Leafs fan?

First some technical background – if this part isn’t your cup of tea, please feel free to skip to the last section – if it is your thing then all aboard the CBA train.

B. HRR and the Salary Cap

By now we’ve all become acquainted with the term Hockey Related Revenue (or “HRR”), and generally speaking it’s fairly self-explanatory, but in case you’re having trouble falling asleep at night and hot milk has ceased to do the trick, the definition can be found in Article 50.1 of the CBA, which is available here.

Hockey Related Revenues.” “Hockey Related Revenues” or “HRR” for each League Year means the operating revenue, including Barter (as defined), from all sources, whether known or unknown, whether now in existence or created in the future, as expressly set forth in this Section 50.1(a), of each Club or the League, for or with respect to that League Year, as expressly set forth in this Section 50.1(a), on an accrual basis, derived or earned from, relating to or arising directly or indirectly out of the playing of NHL hockey games or NHL related events in which current NHL Players participate or in which current NHL Players’ names and likenesses are used, by each such Club or the League, or attributable directly to the Club or the League from a Club Affiliated Entity or League, as expressly set-forth herein, and is subject to any inclusions or exclusions as expressly set forth in the Article 50. 

All of which is a fancy legal way of saying that revenues derived directly or indirectly from the blood, sweat, and tears of current NHL Players will count toward HRR. Not surprisingly, Articles 50.1(i)(C) and 50.1(i)(D) incorporate special games (like the 6 occurring during the 2013-2014 season) and national digital broadcast deals (like the Rogers deal), respectively, into HRR as these are clearly revenue streams derived from current NHL Players.

Now, let’s consider for a moment what the Rogers Deal and the outdoor games will mean to HRR. The NHL was previously earning about $190 million a year broadcasting NHL games in Canada. Under the terms of the Rogers deal, that number will increase to $300 million in 2014-2015, and will culminate in payments of $550 million by year 12 of the deal. Add to that the $150 million upfront payment that will occur in the first two years of the deal, and we’re looking at HRR increases of $185 – $360 million per season.

On top of the Rogers deal, you can also add the six outdoor games, which each gross approximately $30 million, for a total HRR boost of $365 million dollars starting next season; even leaving aside the two other areas of strategic growth that the NHL believes will  spur national revenue gains over the next three years.

So why do we care what happens with HRR?

Well, by virtue of Article 50.5 of the CBA, HRR is used to determine the salary range for NHL teams. Without boring you with too many details, the salary cap for a given season is determined by using Preliminary HRR. Preliminary HRR is the amount of HRR determined at the close of the previous regular season. From this Preliminary HRR, costs associated with pension benefits for former NHL players are deducted, leaving us with a sort of net HRR. The net HRR is then multiplied by 50% (i.e. the Player’s Share) and then divided by 30 (the number of current NHL clubs).

The figure derived from this calculation is known as the midpoint, which is then adjusted up 5% each season in order to get the midpoint used to calculate the salary cap range (this is subject to change if the NHL and NHLPA want to use a different adjustment factor). In order to get the Upper and Lower Limits of the cap, the NHL then applies a 15% range around the midpoint, such that the Upper Limit is 115% of the midpoint, while the Lower Limit is 85% of the midpoint, giving you the allowable salary range.

All of which is to say, the higher the HRR in any given season, the higher the midpoint, and the higher the cap will rise in the next season. Meaning that while the 2014-2015 season will see a moderate increase to the cap, with projections suggesting a $67.7 million Upper Limit, and $50 million Lower Limit, things are going to get really interesting starting in the 2015-2016 season and beyond when the impact of the Rogers deal on HRR will begin to be seen in the cap. In fact, these same projections indicate that the salary cap may be as high as $80 million for the $2016-2017 season at the point when the NHL has presumably achieved its goal of a $1 billion increase in national revenue, and as high as $100 million by the time the CBA expires in 2022.

Follow me so far? If so, good, if not, keep reading to see what this means for the Leafs (which is what you really wanted to know anyway).

C. The Rising Cap and Leafs Contracts

Leaving aside last off-season when the Upper Limit of the salary cap shrank from $70.2 million to $64.3 million (which was CBA mandated and which we can thank for having Mason Raymond on a $1 million contract), salaries for free agents escalate year-over-year. This is simply the economic reality of professional hockey, and generally speaking, professional sports. In 2007-2008, the average salary of an NHL player was $1.9 million; in 2013 it’s about $2.5 million. That is an increase of 32% in six seasons, one of which included a half-season lock-out.

To put that in context, the Upper Limit is projected to increase about 25% in the next 3 seasons, and 55% by the end of the CBA in 2022, which suggests that the cap is set to rise at a rate that is about fast as the recent historical rate of salary increases for NHL players.

Why am I telling you this? I’m telling you this because it means we have to think about player contracts differently. Given the (rapidly) rising salary cap, the important number in evaluating a player’s value to the team is not the player’s average cap hit as a dollar figure, but the percentage that dollar figure makes up of the Upper Limit in any given year. This amount tells us not only what the player’s value is to the team, but also the impact of the player’s salary on the team’s ability to surround him with other talented players. Let’s call this figure the player’s “Relative Compensation”.

(i) Relative Compensation

The Relative Compensation figure makes sense for a team like the Leafs because it indicates what percentage of the Upper Limit (and as a cap team, the Leafs’ will spend to the Upper Limit) the player accounts for, and how much of the Upper Limit will be left to sign other players. Based on what we know, for every year of term on a player’s contract it is safe to assume two things; first, that his Relative Compensation will decrease as a function of the rising cap, and second, that the cost of acquiring a similarly talented UFA will increase as average salaries continue to rise. That being the case, and as long as a player is performing consistently, he’s providing greater relative value in each following season.

The trick if you’re a GM trying to sign a free agent is to figure out a salary number and a term that allows the player’s Relative Compensation to be less than or equal to his level of play for as many of the contract years as possible. When a UFA is signed it’s not unlikely that his cap hit and Relative Compensation will exceed comparable players in the short-term, this is just the reality of signing a new contract, especially with UFA’s. However, as time progresses the player should become relatively more valuable than a comparable player as his Relative Compensation decreases and the cost of signing a comparable player as a free agent increases – all of which assumes that the player’s level of play has not suffered significant regression at the time of comparison.

The Relative Compensation statistic is also useful because it allows us to make historical comparisons between players who are making different salaries across a number of seasons, based on the percentage of the Upper Limit the player’s cap hit accounted for during any given season. By doing this comparison we can estimate whether the cap hit associated with a player in a current season is, relatively speaking, of equal value to a player of comparable talent in a previous season, as well as roughly estimate what a player of comparable talent should cost (in cap dollars) in the future. All of which allows us to determine whether the player being compared is providing value to his team relative to his cap hit.

(ii) Relative Compensation: David Clarkson

Let’s use the newly signed David Clarkson as an example, although this analysis could be used for any player. David Clarkson will earn $5.25 million for the next 7 seasons. Based on this season’s Upper Limit figure, his Relative Compensation is 8.2%. At 8.2% Relative Compensation in the 2013-2014 season, David Clarkson is being compensated roughly the same as Marion Hossa. Now that looks pretty high, but what will this contract look like during the 2016-2017 season, which is when Clarkson’s deal will be half completed, and when the Upper Limit is projected to reach $80 million? At that time Clarkson will be making 6.56% Relative Compensation.

For comparison’s sake, let’s look at what a player making 6.56% Relative Compensation looks like during the 2013-2014 season, which is a $4.22 million player.

NHL Forwards Currently Making Similar Relative Compensation

Boston BruinsLoui Eriksson$4.25 million
Boston BruinsBrad Marchand$4.5 million
Buffalo SabresCody Hodgson$4.25 million
Buffalo SabresVille Leino$4.5 million
Calgary FlamesJiri Hudler$4 million
Calgary FlamesDavid Jones$4 million
Chicago BlackhawksBryan Bickell$4 million
Colorado AvalancheP-A Parenteau$4 million
Columbus Blue JacketsR.J. Umberger$4.6 million
Dallas StarsRay Whitney$4.5 million
Dallas StarsErik Cole$4.5 million
Florida PanthersTomas Fleischmann$4.5 million
MontrŽal CanadiensDaniel Briere$4 million
MontrŽal CanadiensMax Pacioretty$4.5 million
Nashville PredatorsMike Fisher$4.2 million
Nashville PredatorsPatric Hornqvist$4.25 million
Nashville PredatorsDavid Legwand$4.5 million
New York RangersRyan Callahan$4.275 million
Ottawa SenatorsMilan Michalek$4.333 million
St. Louis BluesDavid Backes$4.5 million
St. Louis BluesT.J. Oshie$4.175 million
St. Louis BluesChris Stewart$4.15 million
St. Louis BluesDerek Roy$4 million
Tampa Bay LightningRyan Malone$4.5 million
Tampa Bay LightningTeddy Purcell$4.5 million
Washington CapitalsBrooks Laich$4.5 million
Washington CapitalsMartin Erat$4.5 million
Winnipeg JetsOlli Jokinen$4.5 million
Winnipeg JetsAndrew Ladd$4.4 million
Vancouver CanucksAlex Burrows$4.5 million
Vancouver CanucksDavid Booth$4.25 million

It would be a stretch to describe most of these players as being comparable to Hossa, but these are the types of players that 6.56% Relative Compensation buys. The question then becomes, can a 32 year old David Clarkson provide equal or better play for the Leafs in 2016-2017, than the players in this list will for their teams during the 2013-2014 season? If so, then Clarkson’s Relative Compensation in 2016-2017 will be in line with his play, and he’ll be of value to the Leafs.

If he is not outperforming the players on this list, then we also have to ask what it would cost to acquire a comparable player to a 32 year old David Clarkson as a free agent in 2016-2017. If a similar player would cost $5.25 million or more, then David Clarkson will again be providing value to the Leafs. If a comparable player would cost $5.25 million or less, then David Clarkson will not have provided value to the Leafs, and would be unlikely to ever perform to the level of his contract.

Looking at the list, are these players that David Clarkson circa 2016-2017 can outperform? Outside of Martin Erat, Daniel Briere, R.J. Umberger, Ryan Malone, Ville Leino, Ray Whitney and Erik Cole, there aren’t many candidates for Clarkson to outdo. That being the case, if David Clarkson is ever to provide value for the Leafs that is commensurate with his pay, it will have to come from increases to player salaries that outpace the rising salary cap, making 32 year old David Clarkson a relative bargain. In other words, while Clarkson may become more valuable than he is now based solely on the economics of hockey, don’t expect him to perform up to his Relative Compensation.

Now we know what to expect from David Clarkson, but what does Relative Compensation mean for another high-profile Leaf, UFA to-be, Dion Phaneuf?

(iii) Relative Compensation: Dion Phaneuf

This season Dion Phaneuf is making $6.5 million in the last year of a 6 year deal. His Relative Compensation is 10.1%. At 10.1%, Phaneuf’s Relative Compensation is not far removed from a player like Zdeno Chara – he of the Norris Trophy and Stanley Cup. So is Dion Phaneuf overpaid by a little? Probably.

Now let’s assume for the sake of argument that Phaneuf signs the $7 million times 7 year contract that Kypreos reported last month. Let’s assume also that by year 3 (the 2016-2017 season) that a 31 year old Phaneuf has not seen any significant regression in his game, which I would argue is a fair assumption given his play this season and his relative durability over his career.

In year 3, when the cap is projected to reach $80 million dollars, Phaneuf’s Relative Compensation would be 8.75%, and he’d actually be more valuable to the Leafs, relatively speaking, than he is during the 2013-2014 season despite his increased cap hit.

For comparison sake, let’s look at what Relative Compensation of 8.75%, which equates to $5.625 million this season, buys you.

NHL Defenseman Currently Making Similar Relative Compensation

Buffalo SabresTyler Myers$5.5 million
Columbus Blue JacketsJames Wisniewski$5.5 million
Calgary FlamesDennis Wideman$5.25 million
Dallas StarsSergei Gonchar$5 million
MontrŽal CanadiensAndrei Markov$5.75 million
Pheonix CoyotesOliver Ekman Larsson$5.5 million
Pheonix CoyotesKeith Yandle$5.25 million
Philadelphia FlyersKimmo Timonen$6 million
Philadelphia FlyersMark Streit$5.25 million
Pittsburgh PenguinsPaul Martin$5 million
San Jose SharksBrent Burns$5.76 million*
Tampa BayMatt Carle$5.5 million
Vancouver CanucksAlexander Edler$5 million
Washington CapitalsMike Green$6.08 million
Winnipeg JetsTobias Enstrom$5.75 million
*Brent Burns signed this contract in August, 2011 and was not converted back to forward by the Sharks until March of the following season. 

Looking at this list, if Dion Phaneuf is making $7 million in 2016-2017 then his decreased Relative Compensation of 8.75% could not be expected to buy a team the equivalent of a Zdeno Chara, so Chara is no longer a fair comparable. As the list above demonstrates, with maybe a couple of exceptions, the defensemen with a Relative Compensation of 8.75% are  not “stud” number one defensemen in the Chara mould, but either good-to-very good second-pairing guys, or offensive specialists with defensive limitations.

Is Dion Phaneuf a high-end second pairing defenseman? In his sleep. This is a player that plays the toughest minutes on his defensively porous team every night, yet still sits at +12. Phaneuf plays both of the special teams, is good for about 40 points a season, and wears the ‘C’ in one of the toughest media markets in the NHL. Add to that his penchant for opportune goal scoring (I count 24 game-winning goals to his NHL resume), and his ability to lay a big hit or fight, and you’ve got the makings of a very good, if not quite elite all-around defenseman. As the list above demonstrates, that description is on the positive side of what a team can expect to get for Relative Compensation of 8.75%.

What’s more, is it reasonable to expect that in 2016-2017, when the Upper Limit has reached $80 million, that a team will be able to acquire a player of 31 year old Phaneuf’s calibre and spend less than 8.75% Relative Compensation (or $7 million); especially in light of rising player salaries?

Either way that you break it down, Dion Phaneuf is likely to provide value to the Leafs at $7 million until 2018-2019 when he’ll be 33 and should be expected to decline. At that point he’ll have completed 5 of his 7 contract years, or 70% of his contract. For a free agent to provide value relative to his contract for at least 70% of his contract  is actually pretty good. In order to achieve the same feat, Ryan Suter will have to be playing up to his $7.58 million dollar contract until the 2020-2021 season.

Furthermore, given that the cap is forecasted to reach $100 million by 2022, which is the year after Phaneuf’s proposed deal would end, his Relative Compensation will also continue to fall for the life of his deal, and it will not be necessary for him to play at his current level in order to provide value relative to his contract.

All of which is to say, if we can get Dion to sign on the dotted line for $7 million or less, for 7 years or less, then that’s a deal the Toronto Maple Leafs can and should live with, and we have Rogers and 6 outdoor games this season to thank for it.

Until next time,

Elliot

  • peterbleafs

    All is in balance again in Toronto.  Leafs are in a skid and the Raptors suck again as usual.  Life is good.

  • MaxwellHowe

    Thank you Mr. Sacucci for the diversion.  Very interesting read.
    Also looking forward to seeing Gus Katsaros and his continuing analyses of the Leafs systems.  He may want to submit those quickly while RC is still in charge.
    I agree with Damien Cox (WOW) that Rielly should be loaned to the WJC team.  Liles can man the fort, such as it is.  Get the kid out of this kitchen, give him some positive experience, and give Liles chance to impress so we can trade his ass.
    I hope Nonis just waives Smithson and McvLaren this morning.  Don’t even talk to RC, just do it.  Clear message to RC.  Things have to change here.
    Despite the puzzling attitude of a few naysayers, Gardiner played quite well last nite.  He was evading forecheckers and leading the charge up the ice consistently.  Winning battles.  Clearly, Phaneuf, Gunnar and Gardiner are the top 3 Dmen right now.  Get Franson back with Gardiner.  Franson will break out of his slump.  Not a bad top 4.  Not the Blackhawks, but not bad.  Liles and Ranger for the third pairing.

  • Joe_17

    Wait…did I just do math?

  • PEIleafnation

    how bout that jay trade lol

  • 93Matty

    This doesn’t answer the question from last night, ” is the sky falling” ….

    A great read, and I hope this will assure doubters that Dion @ 747 is a great value.

  • 93Matty

    PEIleafnation  It was actually a fantastic trade for a few reasons. 
    1 He was out of options and wasn’t making the team next year. 
    2 If sent down would be picked off of waivers, in saying that gaining any assets for him was fantastic. The players brought in will be minor league / call ups .  
    3 It opens up a roster spot.

  • Belfour20

    93Matty PEIleafnation I honestly just wish AA would get a pitcher by now, this is just ridiculous now, we cant pitch and we cant defend well, but we sure can hit home runs

  • PEIleafnation

    93Matty PEIleafnation not the move im looking for

  • 93Matty

    PEIleafnation 93Matty The move your looking for might need a roster spot … like a two for one ? You realize this is a smaller trade leading into the december meetings ? He could sign a top 3 starter yet.

    We all should be hoping for Tanaka … He easily comes in and is a top end starter.

  • 93Matty

    Belfour20 93Matty PEIleafnation  No doubt, our pitchers are so far removed from our better years.
    HOWEVER, Dickey was a decent number 2 man, and Johnson was brought in to be our ace. No matter what ppl think Dickey was brought in to be a 500+ top 3 guy. Johnson was always talked of as having a huge break out year… and he def broke something last year.

  • Belfour20

    93Matty PEIleafnation I hope we can grab Tanaka, thats would be a huge addition to this team. We lost a lot of games based on terrible defense and pitching. 
    I also think Gibbons was out managed in a lot of situations as well, I think he’s too laid back of a manager and we need someone who will get on a guy like JPA if he’s still around and actually sit him.

  • Belfour20

    93Matty Belfour20 PEIleafnation I think johnson just belongs in the NL, the american league ate this guy up, hopefully he can get his career back on track with the padres.

  • 93Matty

    Belfour20 93Matty PEIleafnation  I think somewhere JPA will rebound so well. What I hate most about the jays is how cheap they are. An example, the Yanks and Boston would take JPA and use him as a number 2 C and as a DH/ Bench guy this coming season. They’d sign him, and use him as depth. The jays just shit all over the guy and let him go.
    Our catchers last year were so horrible, offence was pathetic, and defence was a total joke.
    Tanaka isn’t our only hope, but it would be so fantastic. (24/0 with a 1.27 era last year) Watch a bigger budget team grab him.
    Gross I know, but I’d also sign Hallday as a cheap option so he can finish up here.

  • 93Matty

    Belfour20 93Matty PEIleafnation I don’t hope to much for him. They’ll turn him back into a 500+ guy

  • Burtonboy

    I posted this last night . We had 25 % of our top players out of that game . Kadri, Lupul, Franson , and Bozak for over 1/2 the game . And of course we can’t forget Bolland is out as well . Guess what ? We still made a game of it against the second best best team in the NHL. That indicates to me when this team is healthy and we ice a full line up we can compete . Change up some of the personnel on the 4th line and tweak the back end and you will see a team that can and will compete against the best in the League .
    JVR – Bozak – Kessel
    Lupul – Kadri – Clarkson 
    Raymond – Bolland – Kulemin / Leivo
    Ashton – McClement  – Orr/Kulemin

    Gardiner – Phaneuf
    Gunnarson – Rielly 
    Ranger – Franson 

    We have to ride out this storm of injuries and bad luck before we start tampering in any major way with a line up that we haven’t seen iced yet this yr. A foolish move could set this team back in a big way

  • Belfour20

    93Matty Belfour20 PEIleafnation I would even consider a guy like Ubaldo Jiminez too as a 4th or 5th guy as well, would be a solid addition to the squad.

  • Mind Bomb

    Good morning Folks, good game last night 

     Thanks Elliot for the write up

  • Mind Bomb

    Joe_17  Morning Joe, how have you been ?

  • phaneufoundlander

    Great write up Elliott….you were a brilliant math student I take it :)

  • Burtonboy

    phaneufoundlander Pretty dam good Lawyer as well

  • Mind Bomb

    Burtonboy phaneufoundlander  Divorce attorney ? just in Case lol

  • Burtonboy

    Mind Bomb Burtonboy phaneufoundlander LOL could be

  • mcloki

    Fantastic article Elliot. Where else do you actually get news concerning hockey. Love this site.

  • 93Matty

    Burtonboy  Yes we weren’t able to ice our full roster, but it shows a huge hole in our team. Depth, we simply lack the depth that was here a year or so ago. Our C depth with grabo gone is horrible. If Bozak is injured for a while again I’m scared to think how far we’ll fall.

  • mcloki

    The sky isn’t falling. Though it is raining pretty hard. I hope they rally and beat the Sens on the weekend.

  • Burtonboy

    93Matty Burtonboy If Grabo was here then Bozak would be gone . The depth would not be any different

  • Mind Bomb

    Burtonboy Mind Bomb phaneufoundlander  That was a better game last night BB, I think it might be time to for management to consider our 4th line as important. They cant even handle 5 mins of playing time safely. I loved how we battled back in the second and competed in the 3rd, thats all I ask, Compete. I dont have to win every game to be happy, But watching getting out shot 50 to 17 say is not fun lol

  • Mind Bomb

    mcloki  Morning MC, we trounce Dallas on thursday first, then we smoke Ottawa. That will cheer everyone up around here, well most of us anyways :)

  • Burtonboy

    Mind Bomb Burtonboy phaneufoundlander The 4th line is a disaster and were the reason we lost that game .

  • phaneufoundlander

    Mind Bomb Leafs played well Bomber,  and we have to give them full marks,  Phaneuf missed a glorious chance, Gunnar missed a great chance, Clarkson hit the post…2 of the 4 goals by the sharks were fluke tips, both off our own players, we just don’t have any luck right now….none actually….the Leafs could have won this 2-1…..its been rough with 5 top players out at
    once and 3 of our top centers at one point….take away 5 top players on any team, or their 3 bets centers and see how bloody good they’d be.
    Lup, Bolland, Fran, Kadri, Bozak, that’s a top line on any team; and even Fraser is not 100 %……Man, its been a hell of year for injuries. If we can sneak out of December @ 500 I think we’ll be ok to make the playoffs…..but if injuries keep accumulating, we are screwed

  • phaneufoundlander

    Burtonboy agreed, a trade is not the answer here…just play .500 through December and we should be ok…surprisingly we are still in good shape in the standings.

  • phaneufoundlander

    mcloki Is Segin in for Dallas on Thursday?

  • phaneufoundlander

    PEIleafnation they traded Mclement? Bastards lol

  • phaneufoundlander

    Joe_17 whats up Joe Money?

  • Burtonboy

    phaneufoundlander mcloki He didn’t play last night . He may be ready for Thursday is the word

  • Mind Bomb

    Burtonboy Mind Bomb phaneufoundlander  My feelings to, I dont expect our 4th to win us games, but dont lose us games, yikes. I am on the have an enforcer Team, but FML is not it. When healthy maybe this as a 4rth
    Ashton-Smith-MCL
    Orr as a 7th.

  • phaneufoundlander

    Mind Bomb Burtonboy phaneufoundlander I’ve been saying this for weeks….Broll has to got get in this lineup and stir up some shit, crash a few bodies, the guy is a tank horse who can play as well

  • Burtonboy

    Mind Bomb Burtonboy phaneufoundlander Surely after last night Carlyle sees this . The man drives me crazy with these line up decisions

  • phaneufoundlander

    Burtonboy phaneufoundlander mcloki I hope he’s stays dizzy or gets on the juice tonight with some of his buddies lol

  • phaneufoundlander

    Burtonboy Mind Bomb phaneufoundlander Me too man, I’m starting to question Carlye, I really am

  • Mind Bomb

    Burtonboy Mind Bomb phaneufoundlander  Aye, I hope he does, I know I have bitched on here latley, And I feel bad about that, but RC is really making me go WTF latley lol

  • Burtonboy

    phaneufoundlander Burtonboy Mind Bomb I like the style of play he’s trying to get the Leas to play. Look at all teams that win in the NHL . They all play that game . Problem with him is he’s so old school and stubborn about certain players . But ultimately he will have no choice if he wants to remain the coach because what he’s dong with rosters decisions right now is fuckery

  • Mind Bomb

    Burtonboy phaneufoundlander Mind Bomb 
    Fuckery I like it. I will quote you on that one lol

  • Airfreshener

    Burtonboy Mind Bomb phaneufoundlander Agreed 100%

  • Burtonboy

    Mind Bomb Burtonboy phaneufoundlander By all means …… until I get my copyright approved . Then it will cost you :)

  • Mind Bomb

    phaneufoundlander Mind Bomb  It will even out lander, we are justing getting our injuries done with before the playoffs :)

  • Mind Bomb

    Burtonboy Mind Bomb phaneufoundlander See now thats Fuckery P
    :)))

  • Great Dane

    phaneufoundlander Burtonboy Mind Bomb I have being doing that for quite a while now.
    McLaren and Orr Carlyle continues to bring into the lineup and then beyond that he plays them at the most stupid time of the game.
    Sharks most have been laughing all the way to the goal. It is even a home game so the Leafs put on their skaters last.
    That is simply too stupid

  • Wilbur

    I agree with MaxwellHowe. I would send Rielly to the WJCs. RC saying we need him scared me enough. Nobody should “need” a raw 19 year old. The kid is a stud in the making. Send him to the WJCs and bring Liles up. Liles has “been there, done that” with what the Leafs are going through and he might even prove himself trade worthy come deadline day. I find it interesting RC said he’s not going to the WJC team but Nonis said there’s still time to make that decision.

  • Airfreshener

    Burtonboy Mind Bomb phaneufoundlander RE: 4th line. 

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiMOKmp0uZc