[News] Kings terminate Richards contract. UPD: Kings and Richards reach settlement

[Erick Estrada]

NHLPA will be all over this as they won't want a precedent of teams terminating contracts.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Wow... NHL siding with the Kings.

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie
As far as NHL and LAK concerned, Kings are free of obligation to Richards and he's off LA cap, player eligible to sign anywhere.

This shouldn't be a surprise because...the NHL will want owners to be able to terminate player contracts with no financial consequences.

[keratosis]

Wow!!!!

[Tron_fdc]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Wow... NHL siding with the Kings.

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie
As far as NHL and LAK concerned, Kings are free of obligation to Richards and he's off LA cap, player eligible to sign anywhere.

Not a huge surprise. No more guaranteed contracts......

I'm sure the PA is about to have a meltdown though.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by FLAMESRULE

"Waivers from all other clubs"??? Yeah, that's never gonna happen. Or does that mean he had to pass through waivers??

They've already done that when they assigned him to the Monarchs last year.

Originally Posted by cznTiburon

I can't see this being a simple in or out of shape. While I haven't read a player contract before in my mind there would have to be a quantifiable number associated to "in shape" which I highly doubt there is. Like a player has to have certain numbers in a VO2 test or they are considered out of shape. This seems like way too much grey area and they could be setting a pretty crazy precident if this goes forward

Originally Posted by btimbit

Wow. If it is a s simple "You're not in shape!!!" then this is BS

I think its more of: if he officially stated to them to be in shape but actually wasnt. He is contractually obligated to be in shape, if he lied to them about it then thats a breach of contract.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Next up: Nathan Horton's contract terminated by Maple Leafs for material breach. He's got an injury, you say? Why is that my problem? He can't train, he doesn't get paid.

[codynw]

This is seriously scummy on LA's part. I really hope they don't get away with it, but I'm sure they will.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Locke

I think its more of: if he officially stated to them to be in shape but actually wasnt. He is contractually obligated to be in shape, if he lied to them about it then thats a breach of contract.

No, it's not. Not unless there's a provision of the contract that says "if you lie about being in shape, this constitutes a breach". I don't see any such provision anywhere in the SPC.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Next up: Nathan Horton's contract terminated by Maple Leafs for material breach. He's got an injury, you say? Why is that my problem? He can't train, he doesn't get paid.

Clarkson will also join everyone on termination island.

[Yoho]

I have a feeling we're about to get some TMZ style of accusations thrown out by LA.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

What the NHLPA should do is have literally every member find a provision of the SPC they can say the club hasn't perfectly lived up to and send a letter saying they are providing 30 days' notice of the termination of their contract. Literally the entire NHL is a UFA.

[HotHotHeat]

A material breach is a breach that reaches to the heart of the contract’s subject matter and negatively affects the outcome of the agreement. The essential requirement for a material breach is that the non-breaching party did not receive the “substantial benefit” of the bargain. - See more at: http://www.legalmatch.com/law-librar....k5gM1bCn.dpuf

The Kings are clearly just planning to argue this in court.

Unless Richards just gives up.

[puffnstuff]

I have a feeling this is going to be something other than this players fitness level. If the NHL is on board it is probably a personal conduct thing, something egregious enough to warrant termination. Yes, Stoll and Voynov currently have horrible personal conduct issues (understatement on Voynov there) but those two can still play the game whereas Richards doesnt have that protection, he sucks.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Locke

I think its more of: if he officially stated to them to be in shape but actually wasnt. He is contractually obligated to be in shape, if he lied to them about it then thats a breach of contract.

I think that agreement would need to be in place at the time of the initial contract signing, you can't just add stipulations after the fact.

[Huntingwhale]

What a bloody joke. Seriously. I never had anything against the Kings before but F them. They made their bed by trading for that contract. They won 2 cups with him. Did they send a private investigator to follow him around until they found something they could build a case with? With millions of dollars at stake I wouldn't doubt it. God f'ing damnit this is so infuriating to watch yet another team with deep pockets to be able to dig themselves out of the hole they dug themselves in. I thought the compliance buyout was a stupid stipulation in the last CBA. I thought Lombardi was even stupider for not using it when he had the chance. You made your bed, now lie in it.

Now the Kings are able to not only get out of that contract, but use the cap space to sign someone else? A horrible precedent has been set by the league allowing this. Unbelievable.


!#@!@#!$!#@&#

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

I have a feeling this is going to be something other than this players fitness level. If the NHL is on board it is probably a personal conduct thing, something egregious enough to warrant termination. Yes, Stoll and Voynov currently have horrible personal conduct issues (understatement on Voynov there) but those two can still play the game whereas Richards doesnt have that protection, he sucks.

So Voynov beats up his girlfriend and doesn't even get his contract terminated (though the Kings luck out and get him off the cap).

What the hell could Richards have done?

[Erick Estrada]

So the Wild should be pretty excited seeing they now they can set a timetable to terminate the Parise and Suter contracts prior to 2025/26. Looks like there's going to be no consequences at all to these deals so maybe the Flames should trade for Kessel to use him up for his last few prime seasons and then terminate the deal when he comes to camp all plump.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

No, it's not. Not unless there's a provision of the contract that says "if you lie about being in shape, this constitutes a breach". I don't see any such provision anywhere in the SPC.

Originally Posted by Jacks

I think that agreement would need to be in place at the time of the initial contract signing, you can't just add stipulations after the fact.

Of course. I have no idea if its in there or not my point was that it isnt about whether or not Richards was or wasnt in shape, lots of players arent always in shape and thats not grounds for termination of their contracts, so there has to be an additional condition that was breached.

Or we could be completely wrong and footage comes out tomorrow of Richards at the LA Zoo throwing children into the Lion's cage.

It could be anything.

[SuperMatt18]

Looks like Twitter is saying that Richards just declined to stay in L.A. to train this off-season.

That can't be it can it?

Can't believe NHL is letting the Kings off the hook again.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Jacks

I think that agreement would need to be in place at the time of the initial contract signing, you can't just add stipulations after the fact.

Yes they can. Look at the clause I posted earlier (post 53). It allows teams to add stipulations "from time to time during the continuance of this SPC".