Jump to content

[Report] Canucks re-sign Pettersson to 8 year contract @ $11.6M


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Jaimito said:

I don't know the details.  Probably some benefit in fitting in the cap. 

 

All income gets taxed.  CRA won't let a penny go.  

It's to make buyouts less attractive to the team. Signing bonuses aren't included in buyout calculations so the team has to pay the full amount of the sb even if it's being bought out 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ghostsof1915 said:

Warning to Strombone. Don't play Poker with Petey.

I was just typing that he's taking a page out of Lu (and Gino's) book/s.

 

 

  • Huggy Bear 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NoCupSyndrome said:

 

NM is three years and change older. Go back three years and view his production.

Ice Hockey Sport GIF by NHL

ok i just got in my time machine and went bact to when Mackinnon signed his extension. 

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jetliner said:

Can someone explain why half is paid as signing bonus? Do bonuses not get taxed??

It is interesting that I have read somewhere, I believe, that John Tavares is disputing the signing bonus is not considered an income salary and is currently going through a lawsuit against CRA to have its taxes for signing bonus to be a lot lower than the salary base would have.   If John Tavares wins his case, it will help the Canadian teams ability to keep their star players through signing bonus for a new contract in free agent and not have to be taxed that high and would have put us in a level playing field when it comes to tax purpose.  This has been yet to be proven in court through.   That is what EP is betting himself on.  I think there is no signing bonus on year on his 8 year contract so he might have to pay higher taxes on it.  A lot can change when government decide to adjust their tax rates in a near future.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Breadnbutta said:

Happy with the contract but the leafs totally fucked the market.

 

If Nylander never got that bloated extension I bet Petey is closer to 10.

 

Oh well, glad this is over and he's locked up 

Yep, thats what I have been saying. Pasta and his 11.25 would have been the comp that Petey would have either been below or at the most matched. But the Leafs ruined it by setting Nylander as the low bar Petey wouldn't go below. So 11.6 makes sense, Petey uses his comp of Nylander to be ahead of him, but the Canucks use Pasta as the comp to keep it from getting to 12 and higher. 

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, brownky said:

I guess the Canucks' management decided to play some cards of their own with the Carolina threat.

 

Sign, or you can learn to love it in Raleigh.

 

Then he googled Raleigh.

 

Now he's signed.


The more I think about it I don’t think it was a ploy.

 

I think the longer this went on it was always likely teams were gonna start calling. Carolina just happened to be the one to take an actual run at getting him.

 

I do think that management took a hard stance that they weren’t gonna let this go to the summer though. They were scared of their own Takchuk situation happening, especially with how tight lipped and standoffish Petey was being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Hammertime said:

I'm not in here to groan happy he is signed. This argument is horse shit though. 

 

Mak is at 100 points, Pete's at 78 Maks got a cup and "drives play" hate that term but in this case it can't be denied. Pete is not 1mill less of a player than Mak. Nathan is in a different league than Pete. Right now real world Pete should be 3m less than Nate. Am I butt hurt about it no. If anything I think Mackinnon took a discount and Pete took a fair contract hence the 1m gap. 

I disagree, but don't have time to get into it right now.

 

Cap % is the way to look at it.  I'll explain my position in more detail later.

  • Cheers 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, coolboarder said:

It is interesting that I have read somewhere, I believe, that John Tavares is disputing the signing bonus is not considered an income salary and is currently going through a lawsuit against CRA to have its taxes for signing bonus to be a lot lower than the salary base would have.   If John Tavares wins his case, it will help the Canadian teams ability to keep their star players through signing bonus for a new contract in free agent and not have to be taxed that high and would have put us in a level playing field when it comes to tax purpose.  This has been yet to be proven in court through.   That is what EP is betting himself on.  I think there is no signing bonus on year on his 8 year contract so he might have to pay higher taxes on it.  A lot can change when government decide to adjust their tax rates in a near future.  

I thought Tavares was claiming his residence wasn't in Canada, that's why he didn't pay the taxes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Jetliner said:

Can someone explain why half is paid as signing bonus? Do bonuses not get taxed??

I see someone else responded regarding the tax discussion. The other important factor for players doing it is that the signing bonuses get paid up front to start the year and money now is better than money later...especially when it comes to any lockouts that may happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...