Kings terminating Mike Richards contract for material breach [upd: grievance filed]

[seanlinden]

1. He's a UFA right now. So he can participate in the free agency market as if he'd be bought out. So from his perspective it would make no difference in terms of signing on with a different team (Ignoring the ramifications of questions of his character).

2. Obviously the Kings would have preferred to trade him, they are now stuck with a cap recapture penalty.

1. If he believes that his contract was wrongfully terminated, then no, he's not. He can't sign a contract with another team in good faith, realizing that he believes he's under contract to the Kings.

2. Yup, which is why it may not be as simple as "Richards gets a retroactive buyout".

 

[seanlinden]

I believe that up to a 6 month ban can be given at the crossing no questions asked. Heck even being turned around at the border for forgetting your passport can lead to all sorts of complications in the future.

For the average joe... yes it can.

It also (generally) takes weeks or months to get the appropriate visas to work in the US... NHL players who get traded mid-season generally have that done within a day or two. When you're an NHL player, these things get dealt with so that they're not a problem... the US government isn't out to passive-aggressively screw with the NHL's business. If they've got a problem with a player, it's not that he mouthed off to a border guard or forgot to declare something.

 

[Jeffrey93]

I hate that article. They say everything except for what the actual reason for the termination is.

Also, I take everything published by SNET with a huge grain of salt. They are the owners' media outlet, not the players'.

Nobody knows the reason. Which is kind of my point. The article and quotes I gave state that the reason used was Richards violated this: "“to conduct himself on and off the rink according to the highest standards of honesty, morality, fair play and sportsmanship, and to refrain from conduct detrimental to the best interest of the Club, the League or professional hockey generally"

So......without knowing the reason, isn't everyone jumping the gun?

You must not listen to much Sportsnet radio....all they do is hammer on the Leafs, Toronto FC, MLSE, ACC crowds, etc.

 

[Pilky01]

Nobody knows the reason. Which is kind of my point. The article and quotes I gave state that the reason used was Richards violated this: "“to conduct himself on and off the rink according to the highest standards of honesty, morality, fair play and sportsmanship, and to refrain from conduct detrimental to the best interest of the Club, the League or professional hockey generally"

So......without knowing the reason, isn't everyone jumping the gun?

You must not listen to much Sportsnet radio....all they do is hammer on the Leafs, Toronto FC, MLSE, ACC crowds, etc.

The last time Gary Bettman appeared on SNET Radio's flagship program (PTS with Bob McCown) the most hard hitting question GB was asked was "what was the best birthday gift you ever received".

[mod] The two are inextricably linked for the next decade. SNET needs to promote (and placate) the NHL just as much as the NHL itself.

 

[Jeffrey93]

The last time Gary Bettman appeared on SNET Radio's flagship program (PTS with Bob McCown) the most hard hitting question GB was asked was "what was the best birthday gift you ever received".

[mod] The two are inextricably linked for the next decade. SNET needs to promote (and placate) the NHL just as much as the NHL itself.

I'd say they kind of own them now....can lip them off as much as they want.

Anyway....I don't hear much that says personalities are just toting the company line.

BACK ON POINT....are we not jumping the gun here with Richards? He could have done many many things that would make this justified.

 

[LadyStanley]

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on...ards-situation-with-kings-shrouded-in-mystery

CBS with nice write up. Nothing new. Tweet about how Canadian border security cannot comment on things not in the public domain (WRT any border crossing issues).

This is one of those things that doesn't come around often enough to have much precedent to look to for guidance. It is very difficult to know where this goes next and if we'll find out more about what led to this decision from the Kings.

 

[NSH615]

For the average joe... yes it can.

It also (generally) takes weeks or months to get the appropriate visas to work in the US... NHL players who get traded mid-season generally have that done within a day or two. When you're an NHL player, these things get dealt with so that they're not a problem... the US government isn't out to passive-aggressively screw with the NHL's business. If they've got a problem with a player, it's not that he mouthed off to a border guard or forgot to declare something.

Unless you are the Nashville Predators who had to wait nearly a week for Franson/Santorelli to clear immigration.

 

[LadyStanley]

For the average joe... yes it can.

It also (generally) takes weeks or months to get the appropriate visas to work in the US... NHL players who get traded mid-season generally have that done within a day or two. When you're an NHL player, these things get dealt with so that they're not a problem... the US government isn't out to passive-aggressively screw with the NHL's business. If they've got a problem with a player, it's not that he mouthed off to a border guard or forgot to declare something.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=51483251&postcount=29

NHL player work visas are vastly different from those that the company around the corner is using to hire workers from out of the country. Entirely different pot.

 

[seanlinden]

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=51483251&postcount=29

NHL player work visas are vastly different from those that the company around the corner is using to hire workers from out of the country. Entirely different pot.

Yeah, that's my point.

Mouthing off to a border guard or failing to declare the shopping you did isn't going to get his visa revoked, or cause him future difficulties at the border. It'll be documented, there will be some sort of proceeding, maybe has to pay a fine, and all would go on.

He had to do something serious.

 

[cbcwpg]

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nhl/...e-investigation-involves-mike-richards-source

Mike Richards, whose contract has been terminated by the Los Angeles Kings, is part of an ongoing investigation by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for an off-ice incident, a source told ESPN.com on Tuesday.

A spokesperson for the RCMP in Manitoba told ESPN that, as of Tuesday, no charges have been brought against Richards but declined to comment further.

The source said that Canadian Border Services is also involved in the investigation, but a spokesperson declined comment, citing Canadian privacy laws.

 

[cbcwpg]

So, just how many players have just had there contracts cancelled outright over the years due to "mis-behaving" ?

 

[indigobuffalo]

1. He's a UFA right now. So he can participate in the free agency market as if he'd be bought out. So from his perspective it would make no difference in terms of signing on with a different team (Ignoring the ramifications of questions of his character).

2. Obviously the Kings would have preferred to trade him, they are now stuck with a cap recapture penalty.

Even if they traded him they would have had the cap recapture penalty, but only when Richards retired/was bought out.

Any point at which the contract ended prematurely would've saddled LA with that penalty.

 

[yay]

Mods, delete if this approaches or crosses a line.

There are 2 categories of offenses I'm aware of that would engender this type of situation, with the secrecy, contract termination, and hesitancy to report anything. And only one should involve the border.

As has been stated by many publicly, drugs shouldn't be cause for the termination, and usually don't involve a drawn out investigation like this without special circumstances.

(Basis for opinion: LE experience.)

 

[hatterson]

So, just how many players have just had there contracts cancelled outright over the years due to "mis-behaving" ?

AFAIK, none in the salary cap era.

 

[Dr Johnny Fever]

I wish somebody who knows, would at least clarify which border. I still say it would be a bigger story with the border to the south.

I have no doubt the PA will grieve the issue. And if they ultimately prevail you can bet they will insist Richards be paid in full for the 15-16 season since the buyout window will have passed. At that point they will likely treat it the same way the league did when teams planned to sit guys for a year in order to buy them out with the first round of compliance buyouts, he will be allowed to be bought out for the last 4 years regardless of where we are in the season.

 

[Proust*]

Mods, delete if this approaches or crosses a line.

There are 2 categories of offenses I'm aware of that would engender this type of situation, with the secrecy, contract termination, and hesitancy to report anything. And only one should involve the border.

As has been stated by many publicly, drugs shouldn't be cause for the termination, and usually don't involve a drawn out investigation like this without special circumstances.

(Basis for opinion: LE experience.)

So what is the category of offense you are referring to?

 

[Burner Account]

I wish somebody who knows, would at least clarify which border. I still say it would be a bigger story with the border to the south.

I have no doubt the PA will grieve the issue. And if they ultimately prevail you can bet they will insist Richards be paid in full for the 15-16 season since the buyout window will have passed. At that point they will likely treat it the same way the league did when teams planned to sit guys for a year in order to buy them out with the first round of compliance buyouts, he will be allowed to be bought out for the last 4 years regardless of where we are in the season.

ESPN has reported that Richards is involved in a RCMP/CBS investigation. So it's the U.S. - Canada border.

 

[Burner Account]

So if Lombardi was potentially going to get some kind of return from the Oilers or the Flames, he has to feel like he has a pretty good idea of what the investigation will reveal.

For awhile, I think he would have used any excuse to unload Richards' contract, but not when he was in talks to trade him.

 

[yay]

Sorry, I should've said in my first post - I don't feel comfortable speculating on a public forum, for legal and ethical reasons. I also hope I'm wrong.

 

[Fugu]

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nhl/s...ichards-source

Mike Richards, whose contract has been terminated by the Los Angeles Kings, is part of an ongoing investigation by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for an off-ice incident, a source told ESPN.com on Tuesday.

A spokesperson for the RCMP in Manitoba told ESPN that, as of Tuesday, no charges have been brought against Richards but declined to comment further.

The source said that Canadian Border Services is also involved in the investigation, but a spokesperson declined comment, citing Canadian privacy laws.

How is this different from Voynov being investigated for an alleged felony, then charged and awaiting trial?

 

[Eric Sachs]

How is this different from Voynov being investigated for an alleged felony, then charged and awaiting trial?

Voynov is good at hockey and Richards isn't anymore.

Have to imagine NHLPA has a rock solid argument given the Voynov comparison.

Kings don't consider a felony charge a material breach of contract.. sort of sets a high standard for them to meet with Richards. Otherwise, they are selectively applying their rules to gain a cap advantage.

 

[Fugu]

Voynov is good at hockey and Richards isn't anymore.

Have to imagine NHLPA has a rock solid argument given the Voynov comparison.

Kings don't consider a felony charge a material breach of contract.. sort of sets a high standard for them to meet with Richards. Otherwise, they are selectively applying their rules to gain a cap advantage.

Exactly. I'd think they'd be within their rights once tried and convicted, which is probably what will happen to Voynov if he's convicted, and the NHL would more than likely be the party that takes that action.

Richards hasn't even been charged with anything at this point.


I'm also reminded that the league cannot fully rely on the CBA to cover itself if they aren't following their own precedents and rules, even if the CBA says the commissioner has the final authority. That actually went to a court, and a judge vacated the NFL's ruling. The league has appealed, apparently.

The NFLPA has a trial starting in August that's related to the NFL's handling of the Petersen suspension, which was the result of a No Contest misdemeanor plea in the case of his 4 yr old son!

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ll-district-court-august-david-doty/28692061/

 

[hatterson]

Voynov is good at hockey and Richards isn't anymore.

Have to imagine NHLPA has a rock solid argument given the Voynov comparison.

Kings don't consider a felony charge a material breach of contract.. sort of sets a high standard for them to meet with Richards. Otherwise, they are selectively applying their rules to gain a cap advantage.

Even an argument about it relating to the border doesn't hold much water. At this point, according to all reports, Richards hasn't even been charged with anything. Even if the situation the Kings heard about may lead to inability to cross the border (which, IMO, would constitute a material breech) he still hasn't been found guilty. Not to mention that Richards is a natural born Canadian citizen, Canada can't just keep him out of the country. Thus any issues with not being able to cross the border would relate to US Border Patrol/Immigration.

The Voynov comparable is also interesting given that, if found guilty, he would have the potential to be deported from the US and also barred from entering Canada, so it's not as if Richards faces any higher punishments than Voynov could potentially.

All that being said, I obviously have no clue what the situation could be, however it seems very strange to go from hearing about a situation to termination of a contract in a matter of a day or two, especially given there's been no charges filed by anyone.

 

[indigobuffalo]

Voynov is good at hockey and Richards isn't anymore.

Have to imagine NHLPA has a rock solid argument given the Voynov comparison.

Kings don't consider a felony charge a material breach of contract.. sort of sets a high standard for them to meet with Richards. Otherwise, they are selectively applying their rules to gain a cap advantage.

I think this is exactly right.

People who think this was anything more than Lombardi trying to land a 'Hail Mary' pass into a tea cup balancing on a billiard ball is reaching.

 

[Gilligans Island]

Putting on my armchair lawyer cap:

- The Kings and NHL know there's almost a 100% probability that the PA files a grievance over this.
- The most obvious outcome of a successful PA grievance is that Richards contract is still in full force.
- The CBA doesn't provide the Kings or NHL leeway in dealing with a cap ceiling violation if the arbitrator finds in favor of Richards/PA.


If I'm the Kings, at this point I would be cautious about spending that "new money" from terminating Richards' contract on other players.

Kings don't gain any significant cap advantage until the 2017-18 season - when the difference between a buyout cap hit and a recapture cap hit is $1.4M. (This season they're slightly worse off ($100K less in cap) and next year, it's only a $400K add'l cap hit.)

I think it would be very hard to prove that the Kings gained a cap advantage going this route since next offseason they have to deal with Kopitar and Lucic's possible re-signings. Too many unknowns at this point.

Unless a ruling takes over 2 seasons, it'll be very hard to prove the Kings gained an advantage going this route vis-a-vis the buyout route.