

Why Can’t Canada Win the Stanley Cup? (2013) - jonbaer
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-cant-canada-win-the-stanley-cup/

======
Tiktaalik
This article touches on the accepted justification for expanding the league by
choosing US cities such as Las Vegas over say Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, which
that in the USA you have this huge possible range to grow, whereas in smaller
Canadian centres hockey may be hugely popular, but its possible that the NHL
is already reaching all the hockey fans they'll ever get and there's little
room for growth.

The question of whether there's any room for further growth in hockey
popularity in Canada is being tested right now. Rogers Sportsnet just bought I
think 10 years of exclusive hockey broadcast rights in Canada and I've read
some articles that state that Rogers will need to increase the amount of
people who watch hockey for this endeavour to be profitable. To start they've
already cranked up the total number of games that appear on TV. It's going to
be interesting to see if they can move the needle.

------
wmat
Interesting article. I think it underestimates the number of regions in Canada
that could support an NHL franchise. For example, the Region of Waterloo, with
a population of 500,000+. If Junior Hockey attendance can be used as a
predictor of NHL attendance, consider that the Kitchener Rangers sell out
their 7000 seat arena for every home game.

~~~
slantyyz
The problem with that is the Maple Leafs. You're not likely to see any teams
pop up within 200km of Toronto, because the Leafs will likely have to get
compensated very heavily for the right to do that.

I live in Markham, Ontario -- just north of Toronto, and they wasted a ton of
money "studying" the construction of an NHL class arena. I think hell would
freeze over before the Leafs allowed another team to enter their geographic
monopoly.

~~~
peeters
Even most Leafs fans I talk to (and myself) think a second Toronto (or at
least southern Ontario) franchise would be good for the Leafs, because it
might actually force them to be good to draw in fans.

~~~
slantyyz
I agree 100%, but when you're making money hand over fist by being the only
game in town...

I'm also guessing, but I am thinking the compensation alone might be enough
deter many investors from starting a new team in the region.

------
kejaed
Well, for 2015 it's cause the Habs can't score any goals, tabarnak.

~~~
TheHydroImpulse
Imagine if they had a power play worth a damn. Habs were 4th in the league in
5v5 scoring iirc.

------
waterside81
What this article has done is outed all the Canadians on HN. Hey hosers!

There is no reason other than the US teams just happen to have drafted better,
hired better etc. Nothing to do with economics as there is a hard salary cap.

Edmonton won the lottery this year and will get McDavid. Maybe that swings the
tables. Had a Canadian team won the lottery the year Crosby was drafted, maybe
that changes things.

Not all trends are explained by stats.

~~~
slantyyz
Edmonton is going to be a scary team over the next few years, given how well
they've done in the draft lottery.

~~~
ende
Or they will continue to be a black hole for first round talent. They badly
need to get their act together at the highest level before they can even think
about putting together a competetive team. An ownership change may be in
order.

------
howeyc
In summary,

They have got close a few times (reaching the finals five times in 19 years,
losing in game 7 four times, ouch).

The teams are not distributed to have a more consistent fans-per-team ratio
everywhere (Canada has lower population, but much much higher hockey interest,
so fans-per-team is higher in Canada). Adding 2-4 teams would probably bring
the fans-per-team ratio closer to USA numbers.

~~~
slantyyz
Not just that, some teams just don't have a vested interest in winning. I
mean, why try if people are going to give you money regardless of how you
perform?

With maybe the exception of this season, the Toronto Maple Leafs were
basically guaranteed to sell out every game.

The Leafs haven't won a Stanley Cup since 67, 3 years before I was born, and I
honestly don't think it will happen again in my lifetime.

~~~
vaadu
The Leafs were under-achievers last year and recently hired arguably the best
coach in the league in Mike Babcock.

I expect them to be in the playoffs next year and contending for the cup in
the near future.

The Leafs are also the the most valuable team in the NHL.
[http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/](http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/)

~~~
slantyyz
>> contending for the cup in the near future.

You can't be serious about that, can you? They usually make an expensive PR
move every few years when it looks like they run the risk of fans keeping
their money in their wallets, but don't often follow up with results.

Granted, Pat Burns got great results in 92/93 with a team full of scrubs when
he took over the Leafs (don't get me started on that non-call on Gretzky in 92
that could have sent the Leafs to the finals), we haven't seen much legitimate
excitement since then. Sure, the Leafs made a couple more semi-finals with Pat
Quinn, but those were with significantly better teams, so much less of an
achievement in my mind.

But the NHL is not the same as it was in the 90s. Everyone is bigger and
faster, and the team hasn't had a legitimate superstar on the team in the way
that Chicago or Pittsburgh has had for quite some time. And when they have had
a superstar, that guy never had much help from the rest of the team. I don't
think they've been legitimate contenders for a long, long time. The best that
they've ever been is a "threat" or "dark horse".

While I've managed to "check out" on the Leafs for almost a decade now, I feel
especially bad for longtime fans like my Dad, who year-in, year-out get set up
with trumped up expectations for the Leafs only to be let down every single
time. At least he witnessed them winning a cup before I was born though. And
in two years, it's going to be half a century without a cup.

~~~
baldfat
Okay so the Maple Leafs are the analog to the NBA New York Knicks!

Yeah it is the worst to be a fan of a very popular team that sells out when
you are just fighting for 50% win rate.

~~~
lotharbot
or the LA Clippers prior to Blake Griffin / Chris Paul. "This team is on its
way up... no, wait, their cheap owner let all his promising young players go,
and brought in only midlevel free agents yet again. Here comes a 27-win
season!" These teams can do that because they have so many fans and such a big
market that they can sell out even if they're terrible.

~~~
baldfat
No LA Clippers are not a the top Fan Based Team in the league.

------
tixocloud
What would be interesting is to take a deep-dive into the players that
American and Canadian teams have - my hypothesis is that American teams just
have better players overall, which could be due to the currency differences.
As it is, the American teams arguably have a ton of Canada's best players.

~~~
noer
All players are paid in USD, regardless of where the team is located. I think
American teams have better players because of the living/playing conditions.
There isn't a huge expectation to win every single year and for the most part
the cities are nicer to live in during the winter.

~~~
slantyyz
>> I think American teams have better players because of the living/playing
conditions.

To get the best hockey players via the draft, your team has to be among the
worst for a few years. If you have a consistently middling team like the
Leafs, you'll never be able to draft the likes of a Sidney Crosby, and free
agents who want to win a Stanley Cup generally go to cities where it's most
likely to happen. I don't think Toronto is at the top of the short list.

~~~
noer
I think it's more that free agents don't want to deal with being under the
microscope of the Toronto media.

------
Coincoin
Not a single word about income taxes? I'm not saying it's making a difference,
but it should at least had been investigated.

For instance, someone playing for the Montreal Canadians will get taxed for
about 55%. That's a significant difference compared to any American team where
income taxes of 40% is considered high.

Edit: Wow, I grossly underestimated how rich people are taxed.

------
peeters
> Major League Baseball’s Kansas City Royals, for example, aren’t merely
> unlucky to have failed to reach the playoffs in 28 years: they have usually
> stunk.

I smiled at that given what has happened since. But my smile disappeared when
I realized that now my Toronto Blue Jays would be the go-to-example in the
Royals' place.

~~~
slantyyz
I don't think the Jays have been as spend happy as they were prior to 93.
Since then, it seems like the belt has been very tight. 92-93 were great years
to be a Toronto sports fan.

------
makeitsuckless
Uh, because the NHL, like most professional North-American sports is a
completely artificial franchise based entertainment operation thinly disguised
as sports?

It has ice hockey teams in California for fuck sake!

(Yes, this is me as a snobbish European speaking. I will never understand how
this form of sports competition can be taken seriously. Although come to think
of it, compared to most of the world, North America doesn't take sports
competitions that seriously.)

~~~
peeters
Are you talking about the North America that has around 15 universities with
higher average (football) attendance than any team in the Champion's League
gets [1][2]?

[1]
[http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/Attendance/20...](http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/Attendance/2014.pdf)

[2] [http://www.worldfootball.net/attendance/champions-
league-201...](http://www.worldfootball.net/attendance/champions-
league-2014-2015/1/)

