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

[sureLoss]

Here is the NHL's substance abuse program document that was filed in the Boogard lawsuit:

http://sportsdocuments.com/2013/07/n...abuse-program/

Spoiler!

IF Richards was in the NHL's rehab program and violated the program, then the most that could have happened to him was he would have gotten suspended without pay.

This incident would also be the first time he would have failed the rehab program (if he was ever in it) as he was never suspended before.

[VladtheImpaler]

I notice it's always the articling students and the 1st year lawyers who are the experts. The rest of us know that we know nothing.

[Strange Brew]

Be wary of the self professed expert.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Be wary of the self professed expert.

That sounds like "expert advice" to me.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Here is the NHL's substance abuse program document that was filed in the Boogard lawsuit:

http://sportsdocuments.com/2013/07/n...abuse-program/

Spoiler!

IF Richards was in the NHL's rehab program and violated the program, then the most that could have happened to him was he would have gotten suspended without pay.

This incident would also be the first time he would have failed the rehab program (if he was ever in it) as he was never suspended before.

Isn't the speculation that he was caught with enough on him to be charged with trafficking? Who cares if he's I the substance abuse program if he's wandering around with large amounts of drugs. Makes this more about the Kings not wanting to keep a drug trafficker on their pay role vs. how they are handling an addict.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Isn't the speculation that he was caught with enough on him to be charged with trafficking? Who cares if he's I the substance abuse program if he's wandering around with large amounts of drugs. Makes this more about the Kings not wanting to keep a drug trafficker on their pay role vs. how they are handling an addict.

That was in response to Ice's hypothetical situation about a team wanting to terminate a contract for failing the rehab program.

Anyways the same document I linked, says that any drug related arrest will automatically enter a player into the NHL's rehab program.

Also the last update from the RCMP as of a few days ago was that Richards has not been charged. It is even unclear that he was arrested. According to the official release he was "detained" for 4 hours at the border crossing then let go.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Macramalla touches on that - it's not the Kings' call. The substance abuse program is collectively bargained, and the Kings have to follow the terms of it. Which is why they are likely to go the failure to disclose route.

I'm not a lawyer but by the sound of the article he doesn't mention there is any clause that says failure to disclose an arrest (if you can call it that) is grounds for immediate termination. It was after all in the offseason when players are not reporting to work and while he was detained was he actually arrested with mug shot taken? Was he supposed to call Lombardi and tell him; "Hey Dean just letting you know I almost got arrested lol.". It sounds like the Kings are simply trying to give this the old college try of getting out of a bad contract.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Parallex

Don't care. The more the LA Kings suffer the better it is for the Calgary Flames, so I want the Kings to suffer the maximum they can suffer.

I mean from a human perspective I want Richards to get whatever help he needs to beat whatever demons he has of course... but eff the Kings. They're just the competition.

I think no matter what, the LAK will not see any more cap penalties other then the cap recapture penalties. I bet even if Mike Richards wins, it will be a financial settlement/win and it probably won't change re-validate the contract nor will it do anything to change the Kings cap situation.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I'm not a lawyer but by the sound of the article he doesn't mention there is any clause that says failure to disclose an arrest (if you can call it that) is grounds for immediate termination. It was after all in the offseason when players are not reporting to work and while he was detained was he actually arrested with mug shot taken? Was he supposed to call Lombardi and tell him; "Hey Dean just letting you know I almost got arrested lol.". It sounds like the Kings are simply trying to give this the old college try of getting out of a bad contract.

We all know why they are doing it. The question might revolve around whether the arrest and the failure to disclose legitimately ended trade discussions. And then whether that created a material breach.

[Ice]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

That was in response to Ice's hypothetical situation about a team wanting to terminate a contract for failing the rehab program.

My comment was primarily directed at the numerous general posts that the Kings haven't adhered to the substance abuse program guidelines. It's not generally publicized when a player is in the substance abuse program (clearly). It's been suggested that the Kings have taken this opportunity to get cap relief dishonestly.

Failing the substance abuse program is unlikely enough of a breach to terminate a contract. I'm pretty sure the teams in talks about Richards were made aware of any alleged participation in the substance abuse program.

This situation is much more serious and complicated than simply failing in the substance abuse program or being caught with some pills at the border. This needs to be closely monitored by the NHL because of the Kings cap situation. However, the fact that Richards allegedly caused an opportunity for the Kings to determine a material breach, which is more beneficial to the cap going forward, doesn't automatically mean they're attempting to circumvent the cap consequences of a standard buyout.

Im just saying wait for all the facts to come out, if they ever do, before assuming Kings management is unethical and deceitful.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Ice

Im just saying wait for all the facts to come out, if they ever do, before assuming Kings management is unethical and deceitful.

Yeah I think people are jumping the gun. I'm a bit of a sucker for giving people the benefit of doubt but I think there's little chance the Kings are just using a bad situation for easy cap relief and the NHL is playing along.

- Bettman has a history of crushing teams that try and mess with the cap, so he's not likely to be sympathetic.
- The PA and agents and players are almost as deadly an enemy as Bettman
- The Kings already have a #### show on their hands with voyonov and have not terminated his contract, so they are fataed in the court of public opinion
- The Kings know all this, and still went nuclear in terminating the contract , crossing a line no one has even flirted with before that I can remember.

So, to me, either they are really really really dumb, or there is way more to this story than we know. The fact that no one, including Richards, is saying anything to oppose this by now makes me think the latter.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

- Bettman has a history of crushing teams that try and mess with the cap, so he's not likely to be sympathetic.

1. No he doesn't.

2. The NHL has already supported the Kings' decision.

Also, the PR nightmare that is Voynov vs. Richards is easily resolved by winning. The Kings don't really care what people outside of the ticket buying public thinks, and winning solves all in that regard.

It's the union that represents the major stumbling block.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Pretty sure the guy you responded to is actually a lawyer

I was mostly just kidding with the legal stuff, it's just funny how everyone is trying to parse substance abuse programs and provisions of the SPC and the CBA... if this goes in front of an arbitrator, they're not stupid. They will see what's going on here, and that the Kings just want out of this contract. That will not be lost on them and I can't imagine them letting the Kings get away with such an obvious ploy.

As for the Kings being dumb, I disagree; they did manage to get the NHL onside with this and if they lose it likely costs them nothing, they're just back where they were before.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

We all know why they are doing it. The question might revolve around whether the arrest and the failure to disclose legitimately ended trade discussions. And then whether that created a material breach.

Wasn't his detainment (since it's not officially an arrest) within days of the draft? Doesn't seem like a long enough timeline to point to Richards breaching anything unless there is wording that says he has to contact the team within x amount of days.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Isn't the speculation that he was caught with enough on him to be charged with trafficking? Who cares if he's I the substance abuse program if he's wandering around with large amounts of drugs. Makes this more about the Kings not wanting to keep a drug trafficker on their pay role vs. how they are handling an addict.

Do you really think a guy making 6M a year is trafficking drugs on the side to make some spare cash? Or if he was that he would be that stupid to do it himself and not just pay a mule?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Seriously. I guess I could see a situation where he's got a bunch he's going to pawn off to his buddies, but that's just wild speculation.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Do you really think a guy making 6M a year is trafficking drugs on the side to make some spare cash? Or if he was that he would be that stupid to do it himself and not just pay a mule?

Of course not. Just sick of people not making any of these guys responsible for their own idiotic behaviour.

If I got arrested tomorrow with trafficking amounts of drugs on me and I got fired (which I would), no one would be asking if my employer had done enough to help me with my addiction before firing me.

Some of the comments on what LA responsibility here, and the victimizing of Richards in this situation are pure stupidity. He's a grown ass man whose been offered more opportunity in life than most of us can even dream of, at what point is he responsible for his own decisions?

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

I think no matter what, the LAK will not see any more cap penalties other then the cap recapture penalties. I bet even if Mike Richards wins, it will be a financial settlement/win and it probably won't change re-validate the contract nor will it do anything to change the Kings cap situation.

Maybe, but I wouldn't be so certain.

The other owners would weigh this as "precedence to terminate a contract over loose language", vs "Freeing the Kings from a tight cap situation" AND "paying less in penalties".


I imagine there's active communication between owners and Bettman around this.
Does Bettman have full endorsement to push on this contract termination language piece for benefit of the owners as a whole, OVER the short term benefit for a single team? Plausible.

Definitively? Surely, the next 30 days will establish that.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

Of course not. Just sick of people not making any of these guys responsible for their own idiotic behaviour.

If I got arrested tomorrow with trafficking amounts of drugs on me and I got fired (which I would), no one would be asking if my employer had done enough to help me with my addiction before firing me.

Some of the comments on what LA responsibility here, and the victimizing of Richards in this situation are pure stupidity. He's a grown ass man whose been offered more opportunity in life than most of us can even dream of, at what point is he responsible for his own decisions?

Sorry, where are you getting this "trafficking scenario from?" As I understand it, the drug he was apparently caught with is legally prescribed where the majority of his job is performed.

Seems like a radical leap to imply trafficking, especially since he wasn't kept overnight, nor was he formally charged.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Maybe, but I wouldn't be so certain.

The other owners would weigh this as "precedence to terminate a contract over loose language", vs "Freeing the Kings from a tight cap situation" AND "paying less in penalties".


I imagine there's active communication between owners and Bettman around this.
Does Bettman have full endorsement to push on this contract termination language piece for benefit of the owners as a whole, OVER the short term benefit for a single team? Plausible.

Definitively? Surely, the next 30 days will establish that.

Well do you see the contract termination reversed, and Mike Richards showing up to training camp?

I don't.

The part that really has me convinced is that it was Dean Lombardi doing this - a guy who historically has been known to be (a) loyal to his players, and more likely to give loyal but declining players a chance, and (b) he's a lawyer, so I doubt he does this on a low percentage risk and he believes legally, the player has violated his contract enough to warrent termination.

Also, I don't think the owners are as vindictive as fans may be. To me, if the end resolution is favorable to the LAK, I don't see this as just a LAK win - I see it as a NHL/owners win. It might be a "LA got away with bad contract that the should have got rid of last year" to some, but owners might actually see it as a collective statement that a player cannot abuse having a long term contract and let loose, stop being professional and/or abusing legal policies and get away with it because they are pro athletes... this keeps long term contract players more accountable to their contract.