Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle
If the Flames had somehow traded for Richards, no one on here would have any issue with the Flames trying to ditch this contract. The talk on here would be all about how Richards was a bad seed, he's been given his chance and this is a extenuating circumstance that should allow us to drop the contract.
I'm literally blown away by some of the thoughts on here, which must be coming from just a desire to see a rival team not have the opportunity to succeed. I'm fully supportive of the Kings or any team taking different approaches with players on these things, based on the contract and quality of player. Me don't get where this one size fits all mentality comes in, not sure where else in life any of you experience that? Richards has taken actions that IMO make him an unfit employee. Regardless of any thoughts I have about getting him help, IMO that's something Richards has done to himself, and the Kings should be free to terminate his contract. And in the sense of the cap hit, I'm also fine that when a player crosses the line like Richards did with his legal troubles, that that becomes a point where the "buyer beware" of signing contracts goes away. It's not that he just got out of shape or has a bad attitude, he got arrested. At some point the player has to be held responsible.
On the flip, I'm also fine with the Kings, or any other team for that matter choosing to not terminate a contract in a similar situation if they don't want to part ways with a player. I don't doubt for a second if Richards had a more friendly cap hit or was a player performing up to value for contract, the Kings might be taking a different stance, and I'm 100% ok with that. It doesn't have to be fair or one size fits all, that's not how life works. And it's not like this is some loop hole teams can just use to get out of bad contracts, this whole thing is prefaced on players committing crimes. Unless we find out the Kings "set him up", then I'm fine with what the Kings are doing.mid want the Flames to have this option if we invest in Aa player for big money and term and they do the same thing as Richards did.
|
Same here, I'm actually kind of surprised what a somewhat "can do" Calgary belief would support someone getting a free ride for not doing his job. I guess thats part of being a hockey fan though, caring more about trying to screw over your rivals instead of what makes logical sense. Maybe I just believe that you should work for what you pay, and if you constantly show up to work unfit and poor conditioning, you are known to be a party animal and not show up to work ready, you are underperforming, and then you give your employer a legal way out of your contract... I think the choice is very obvious.