Arthur Levitt released the details of his report, commissioned on behalf of the NHL, on the NHL's finances today. To no big surprise, they seemed closely in line with what the NHL has been claiming.

I really wish there were more details released from the report.

Two teams had profits over $10M US last year. One was surely the Maple Leafs, who was the other team? Could it be the Canucks? Could the two most "profitable" teams in the NHL be Canadian?

I'm also curious which category the Senators were in last year. Did they lose money or make money? If they lost money, did the revenue from the 148 Corel Centre suites go to the Senators?

The problem with his is that the public sees this and thinks it is the definitive answer to whether or not the NHL is struggling. A look at the feedback on tsn.ca for this article demonstrates that this report is putting the public on the owners side.

I always keep in mind of this quote from Paul Beeston, "Anyone who quotes profits of a baseball club is missing the point. Under generally accepted accounting principles, I can turn a $4 million profit into a $2 million loss and I could get every national accounting firm to agree with me."

Change baseball to hockey and you understand the NHLPA's point with regards to the numbers.

I suspect that Levitts is just taking the questions the owners give him and coming up with the answers to those questions. What hockey fans really want to know is what are the right questions to ask the owners and what are the answers to those questions.

I find it suspicious that Levitt arrives at appoximately 10% off the owners' claims. Enough to suggest maybe the study is independant and that the owners have tweaked the numbers a bit but not enough to suggest that the owners aren't in financial trouble.