[News] Kings terminate Richards contract. UPD: Kings and Richards reach settlement - Page 49 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Finger Cookin · 10-09-2015, 02:53 PM

So my corrected guess (thanks sureloss) is an $11M payment to Richards spread out over 16 years. That would be half of his salary remaining from the contract, and less than the usual 2/3 of the salary he would get from a normal buyout.

So that would be about a $2M cap hit for the next 5 years, and then $687.5K per year for 11 years thereafter.

Phanuthier · 10-09-2015, 02:54 PM

2031? Lol

Resolute 14 · 10-09-2015, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

So my guess is a roughly $2.7M cap hit for the next 5 years, and then a $1.375M cap hit for the next 10 years after that. Steep. That puts the Kings at a pretty significant disadvantage for a long time if it ends up being the case.

No chance on earth it's that much.

My bet is that it works out to the same total cost of a buy-out - 2/3rds of remaining salary - but the penalty term lengthened to reduce the annual hit.

Finger Cookin · 10-09-2015, 02:57 PM

Yeah, my initial guess didn't take into account a salary reduction. Updated my guess.

Parallex · 10-09-2015, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Actually, yes. Players are expected to tell the teams if they do things like get busted at the border with drugs.

What they're expected to do and what they are contractually obligated to do are two different things... is Richards contractually obligated to do that?

Erick Estrada · 10-09-2015, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Actually, yes. Players are expected to tell the teams if they do things like get busted at the border with drugs. I realize you really just want to be angry because the Kings are scummy, but like it or not, it is really all on Richards for doing something so stupid so as to give them the opening.

Are you busted if you aren't charged though? Wasn't the timeline only a few days from when he crossed the border to the Kings at the draft telling teams Richards did a very bad thing? Absolutely I'm not happy about a divisional opponent using one of these long term contracts to their advantage and winning a cup and then trying to get out of their obligations when the deal no longer is advantageous to them. IMO what Richards did was not nearly as stupid as drinking and driving as no lives were put in harm's way and that seems to be a slap on the wrist.

Parallex · 10-09-2015, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

So that would be about a $2M cap hit for the next 5 years, and then $687.5K per year for 11 years thereafter.

That's pretty close to what his buyout cost would have been albeit spread out differently. (22Mx0.66)/10

CorsiHockeyLeague · 10-09-2015, 03:10 PM

I imagine it'll be whatever the settlement payment is, multiplied by .66, spread out evenly until 2031. Doesn't that make the most sense??

jayswin · 10-09-2015, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Anyone got some pills for Mason Raymond's locker? an they overprescribe OXY for Smid's recovery? Has Engelland jaywalked lately?

What stupid comments to make about our own players.

Ashasx · 10-09-2015, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I imagine it'll be whatever the settlement payment is, multiplied by .66, spread out evenly until 2031. Doesn't that make the most sense??

Isn't the /0.67 what the team actually pays in a buyout scenario though?

Shouldn't it just be settlement payment / years until 2031?

Resolute 14 · 10-09-2015, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parallex

What they're expected to do and what they are contractually obligated to do are two different things... is Richards contractually obligated to do that?

I would be stunned if informing the team about things that could potentially completely derail your ability to play are not contractually obligated.

GioforPM · 10-09-2015, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayswin

What stupid comments to make about our own players.

Your sarcasm meter is off.

GioforPM · 10-09-2015, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I would be stunned if informing the team about things that could potentially completely derail your ability to play are not contractually obligated.

Contractually obligated and grounds for terminating said contract are two different things.

jayswin · 10-09-2015, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Your sarcasm meter is off.

It was on, I knew you were joking, I just wasn't a fan of the comments themselves even in the context. You're taking players you don't like and joking that they become addicted to drugs or get hit by cars. Not great humor, imo.

GioforPM · 10-09-2015, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Yep. Well worth this effort for them as they are reducing the cap hit from buying him out. So I guess teams now have a possible out for some of these long deals. Just hope for the player to have some sort of off ice issues then self declare they have terminated the deal and smear the player enough where they have to settle with the team to save some face. Well done Lombardi.

This was the point of my post (that at least one person missed entirely).

Now teams can use "material breach" as an excuse to get out of a contract for at least less than a buyout.

I say - you hire the player flaws and all. Sure you can terminate him, but you take the cap hit.

GioforPM · 10-09-2015, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayswin

It was on, I knew you were joking, I just wasn't a fan of the comments themselves even in the context. You're taking players you don't like and joking that they become addicted to drugs or get hit by cars. Not great humor, imo.

I defended Mason Raymond all year. Engelland stepped up. I like Smid. This is about their contracts.

And I'm not talking about them - I'm talking about someone setting Raymond up up, the team making Smid breach, or using a minor offence to terminate. Come on - figure it out. Jaywalking is the crime for which Engelland would be terminated. I'm not talking about Engelland getting hit by a car.

Cleveland Steam Whistle · 10-09-2015, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Are you busted if you aren't charged though? Wasn't the timeline only a few days from when he crossed the border to the Kings at the draft telling teams Richards did a very bad thing? Absolutely I'm not happy about a divisional opponent using one of these long term contracts to their advantage and winning a cup and then trying to get out of their obligations when the deal no longer is advantageous to them. IMO what Richards did was not nearly as stupid as drinking and driving as no lives were put in harm's way and that seems to be a slap on the wrist.

If you want to be mad, be mad at Richards for giving them the opportunity, not at the Kings for taking it.

As for the DD comment. I'm with you, but that's an issue with how society punishes and reacts and has built it's laws around DD more than an NHL issue. I'm all for harsher punishments for that act, and if that were to occur, maybe you'd those crimes result in the same type of situation in the NHL as this one did.

Resolute 14 · 10-09-2015, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Contractually obligated and grounds for terminating said contract are two different things.

No, I agree. But as I've said all along, Richards gave them the opportunity to try it.

CorsiHockeyLeague · 10-09-2015, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Isn't the /0.67 what the team actually pays in a buyout scenario though?

Shouldn't it just be settlement payment / years until 2031?

Good point. I bet it ends up being less though.

Dion · 10-09-2015, 06:46 PM

The PA and Richards made the right choice in going for a negotiated settlement as opposed to arbitration. Had they lost it would have opened the door for other teams to do something simlar in the future.