Quote:
Originally Posted by Phanuthier
Welcome to the world of everyone else?
We all work in a industry where we can be let go and replaced if our performance drops. I find it very odd that so many people here are sympathetic to a millionaire athlete (notably one who has made how many million?) who loses his employment because his performance dropped.
The wording is purposefully vague, similar to how a normal standard employee contract is done, and gets terminated with 2 weeks notice... or less.
|
My annoyance with this has more to do with the Kings really only doing this because Richards isn't very good at hockey anymore. If he was playing at his 2011 level, I doubt very much the Kings would care about his alleged drug use, as long as it didn't become public. Well, they might care a little, but ultimately all that matters is Richards worth as an asset and how much money he can make the Kings. Now that he can't make the Kings more money, they are conveniently deciding now is the time to bring the hammer down.
The following is obviously just my opinion, but I think it's quite obvious they chose not to use the compliance buyout last summer because they had this in their back pocket all along. They were probably hoping Richards could get back to being a productive top 6 forward but knew if he didn't, it wouldn't matter because they would have the means to sever all ties with him just the same. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they had a PI following him around to collect dirt given how much money is at stake here. You know what's better than no cap hit? No cap hit AND no real money going to Richards at all. IMO they used his problems against him once it became obvious he no longer served their purposes. I think they knew about Richards' problems for some time but really only began to care once they started to became the LA Kings' problems (ie his play started to slip). They basically gamed the system to their benefit rather than doing the right thing and buy him out. This is just my personal conspiracy theory though, something about this situation really rubs me the wrong way.
To me, this is all about A) the money, B) how many wins the Kings can get and C) managing their cap to ensure A) and B) are in place. Watch them bring back Voynov gleefully with one hand while pushing Richards out with the other. If the organization had any integrity, they would shred Voynov's contract the same way they shredded Richards'. Surely there would be room to argue for a material breach in Voynov's case the same way there was with Richards. Even if there was, why would they? Voynov is good at hockey.
If there was any justice in the universe, Voynov's hockey skills would be replaced with those of a turnip. It probably wouldn't matter though, I'm sure the Kings would find some way to slither out of that too, even if the league re-instated him before LA learned about their new rutabaga.