Mike Richards III (Cleared waivers 1/27/15)

[Herby]

Oh, come on, man. Look back on my post history. You'd be hard pressed to find many "#freerichards" rhetoric. I've always admitted his faults.

You, on the other hand, have been beating the same drum for months. And yes, I don't think you've always viewed Richards with an entirely objective light, just as we all do with players. You continually cite metrics as justification, yet are consistently quiet when stats come out like the recent JftC article which had Richards out chancing/producing guys like Brown and Stoll.

Richards was not as bad as you make him out to be. And yes, I do believe Sutter mismanaged his minutes. Richards contract devalues him as a player. Do you REALLY believe, if he was making 3 million a year, that not a single team in the league would have picked him up off waivers? Saying crap like "Richards is an AHL player, that's why no one claimed him hue hue" exposes your agenda. Like Bob Mckenzie himself stated recently, Richards contract is the problem. The guy is still an NHL player. On the Kings? No, but on some team, that's obvious.

I was beating the drum for months because it got ridiculous to see this guy on the ice for boatloads of goals and dragging Carter down on the second line last season and continuing to do the same on the fourth line. I was beating the drum because despite solid play from That 70's Line to end last season, Sutter went right back to Richards/Carter to start the playoffs and Richards was once again exposed defensively by Thornton before Sutter finally put him back on fourth line. I was beating the drum because Sutter who supposedly "hates" Richards nearly cost the Kings the series with Chicago last year because he continued to use that line despite it being utterly dominated by Chicago in games 5,6 and 7. I was beating the drum because despite how God awful he was playing and how God awful his contract is the Kings chose not to buy him out. Which will go down as likely Dean's worst personnel decision as GM of the Kings. We were told that he was "sick" with a viral infection and was going to be committed to coming to camp in shape and he would return to his previous form, which didn't happen, he continued to suck and ended up in the AHL. Ofcourse the same people calling me a "hater" refuse to acknowledge that any of this is you know, the players fault. Last years conditioning and viral infection has been replaced this year by Sutter's biased favoritism of Stoll, Sutter's mismanaged minutes and Richards lack of PP time (as if that has anything to do with his complete collapse as a player).

If I am a "hater" for arguing numbers and tangible evidence vs. excuse makers and people hyping intangibles then so be it. I would argue that anyone who wanted as recently as two weeks ago to have Mike Richards skating with Jeff Carter is way more biased than myself, K17, BigKing Coach Sutter or any of the other "haters"

And to answer your question, no I don't believe anyone would claim MR for $3m over the next five years, but I don't believe he is an NHL player. so that is where we disagree. Maybe someone takes a chance if he had a year or two left, but the length of the contract is just as bad if not worse than the dollar figure. I just have a hard time seeing a player who's overall game collapsed so much that he ended up in the AHL at age 30 being able to suddenly turn it around and be worth a five year, $15m commitment.

So I have a question for you...What role do you see MR having for an NHL team?

Offensive role?
Defensive role?
Physical role?
Energy role?

I am really struggling to think where he would be effective from his play the last 125 or so games. His offense has dried up, his defense is abysmally bad, he isn't physical. I don't know, I just don't get what people see other than a washed up name.

 

[KINGS17]

If the Kings simply wanted to just rid themselves of Richards, they would have already done that.

Buyout or retain 50% of his salary, would have already happened. Lombardi is trying to do what's best for the team and Richards atm.

I think the strategy that is being employed by Dean here is to show Eastern Conference teams that Richards can still be an effective NHL player in some type of system other than the one the Kings employ.

The only way I see Richards making it back to the Kings this season is if there is an injury to a forward on the NHL roster.

If Dean can't trade Richards after the season, I fully expect a buyout to occur. I don't know what the time window is for buyouts.

 

[Fat Elvis]

My hope is that Richards makes it back to the Kings this season. Dude fell off the last couple seasons and getting him a wake-up call was desperately needed. Looks like he's working his butt off and being a great team guy. I'd like to see him back. LA's better with a contributing MR than without him.

 

[Face Wash]

I don't think Richards get moved or bought out. Not an easy sell for Lombardi to tell his boss "Hey I need 20 million to make this player go away"....

Even for a corporation like AEG. They have certain financial expectations.

So what's Richards cap recapture if he retires after say...next season?

 

[Face Wash]

If the Kings simply wanted to just rid themselves of Richards, they would have already done that.

Buyout or retain 50% of his salary, would have already happened. Lombardi is trying to do what's best for the team and Richards atm.

I don't think Mike Richards is 100% on board with that mode of thinking.

 

[Quattro]

Can't spell hyperbole without ole herby stupid letter p ruining a good joke

POTY

 

[Face Wash]

The Kings aren't getting a 1st for Richards even with salary retained and Weal as a throw in.

First of all, it's going to be an extremely late 1st rounder and they'd be getting a complete winner and former team captain who's had success at every level at age 29/30 who would likely excel in a more wide-open style of play than the defensively responsible scheme he's "stuck" in. Weal is of great interest to TML as most of us have read. The Kid's probably Manchester's 1st or 2nd best player...plus they'd get retained Cap and possibly (in my idea) more cap relief with Jokinen off their books.

Might be crazy, but I think that's all worth a LATE 1st rounder they didn't have when yesterday started. These are the Toronto Maple Leafs...they may rebuild, but a complete 5-year plan with youth movement overhaul? I think there are Canadian laws prohibiting this. I don't buy it.

Everyone on this board OVERRATES draft picks, especially when it comes to Canadian teams that have much more pressure to perform than teams like...say SJ or DAL or TBL or FLA.

 

[Face Wash]

Can't spell hyperbole without ole herby

You also can't spell Old Rich Flu without Flour Child.

 

[Bandit]

I was beating the drum for months because it got ridiculous to see this guy on the ice for boatloads of goals and dragging Carter down on the second line last season and continuing to do the same on the fourth line. I was beating the drum because despite solid play from That 70's Line to end last season, Sutter went right back to Richards/Carter to start the playoffs and Richards was once again exposed defensively by Thornton before Sutter finally put him back on fourth line. I was beating the drum because Sutter who supposedly "hates" Richards nearly cost the Kings the series with Chicago last year because he continued to use that line despite it being utterly dominated by Chicago in games 5,6 and 7. I was beating the drum because despite how God awful he was playing and how God awful his contract is the Kings chose not to buy him out. Which will go down as likely Dean's worst personnel decision as GM of the Kings. We were told that he was "sick" with a viral infection and was going to be committed to coming to camp in shape and he would return to his previous form, which didn't happen, he continued to suck and ended up in the AHL. Ofcourse the same people calling me a "hater" refuse to acknowledge that any of this is you know, the players fault. Last years conditioning and viral infection has been replaced this year by Sutter's biased favoritism of Stoll, Sutter's mismanaged minutes and Richards lack of PP time (as if that has anything to do with his complete collapse as a player).

If I am a "hater" for arguing numbers and tangible evidence vs. excuse makers and people hyping intangibles then so be it. I would argue that anyone who wanted as recently as two weeks ago to have Mike Richards skating with Jeff Carter is way more biased than myself, K17, BigKing Coach Sutter or any of the other "haters"

And to answer your question, no I don't believe anyone would claim MR for $3m over the next five years, but I don't believe he is an NHL player. so that is where we disagree. Maybe someone takes a chance if he had a year or two left, but the length of the contract is just as bad if not worse than the dollar figure. I just have a hard time seeing a player who's overall game collapsed so much that he ended up in the AHL at age 30 being able to suddenly turn it around and be worth a five year, $15m commitment.

So I have a question for you...What role do you see MR having for an NHL team?

Offensive role?
Defensive role?
Physical role?
Energy role?

I am really struggling to think where he would be effective from his play the last 125 or so games. His offense has dried up, his defense is abysmally bad, he isn't physical. I don't know, I just don't get what people see other than a washed up name.

I am seriously amazed that you STILL have this much to say about the guy. It's impressive.

 

[kingsfan]

So what's Richards cap recapture if he retires after say...next season?

Does not cap recapture only affect the teams salary cap, but actual dollar wise the player doesn't get anything because he retired? If so, while it hurts the Kings in the cap world, it does not impact AEG itself.

First of all, it's going to be an extremely late 1st rounder and they'd be getting a complete winner and former team captain who's had success at every level at age 29/30 who would likely excel in a more wide-open style of play than the defensively responsible scheme he's "stuck" in. Weal is of great interest to TML as most of us have read. The Kid's probably Manchester's 1st or 2nd best player...plus they'd get retained Cap and possibly (in my idea) more cap relief with Jokinen off their books.

Might be crazy, but I think that's all worth a LATE 1st rounder they didn't have when yesterday started. These are the Toronto Maple Leafs...they may rebuild, but a complete 5-year plan with youth movement overhaul? I think there are Canadian laws prohibiting this. I don't buy it.

Everyone on this board OVERRATES draft picks, especially when it comes to Canadian teams that have much more pressure to perform than teams like...say SJ or DAL or TBL or FLA.

We ain't getting a 1st for Mike Richards. Even if we add in Weal and $2 million in cap retention, we are still asking a team to eat $3.75 million of cap space on a guy in the minors with five years left on his deal. If the situation was reversed and LA gave up a 30th overall pick for modern day Mike Richards, Jordan Weal and $2 million cap retention, I'd personal pimp slap DL.

 

[Nizar]

We will see. Maybe someone will take the bite. There is always some stupid GM. I just traded Mike Richards and Spencer Watson (Kings 7th round pick last year) for Tyler Mayers and two first round picks in EHM 2007 with newest roster update Make it happen Dean.

 

[Reclamation Project]

Thinking this thread lasts longer than our nearest star.

 

[Herby]

If the situation was reversed and LA gave up a 30th overall pick for modern day Mike Richards, Jordan Weal and $2 million cap retention, I'd personal pimp slap DL.

So I shouldn't bother with my proposal on the trade board of our #1 pick to TOR for Carter Ashton and David Clarkson?

 

[Face Wash]

Does not cap recapture only affect the teams salary cap, but actual dollar wise the player doesn't get anything because he retired? If so, while it hurts the Kings in the cap world, it does not impact AEG itself.

The cap world is the only world I know of, live in or care about. The day I give a rip about Uncle Phil's money will be the day I stop caring about sports. Dean doesn't have to go to Phil about buyouts, just like he didn't have to go to him to okay the deal to get him in the first place.

We ain't getting a 1st for Mike Richards. Even if we add in Weal and $2 million in cap retention, we are still asking a team to eat $3.75 million of cap space on a guy in the minors with five years left on his deal. If the situation was reversed and LA gave up a 30th overall pick for modern day Mike Richards, Jordan Weal and $2 million cap retention, I'd personal pimp slap DL.

You're entitled to your opinion. But my point was and still is, this is the type of deal the Kings would need to make involving Richards. Cap space deal, not a hockey deal. Dean's going to have to be creative at the deadline if he's a buyer. Meanwhile Richards has 9 points in 7 games in the "A" and may be playing his way back. We shall see.

 

[Herby]

Not about points, never has been.

Richards has to demonstrate he can play a 200 foot game at the NHL level for someone to take him, his defensive play and "not being in the mood to check" is why he is in the AHL, not because he stopped scoring. Had he been able to contribute anything positive to the bottom six in either a defensive, physical or energy role he would still be with the Kings and not in Manchester.

NHL scouts and GM's who are scouting him aren't going to care how many points he puts up in the AHL. I would be curious to hear from CNS or others who have watched the games how he looks in the defensive zone or the physicality department, that is what gets MR back to the NHL.

 

[kingsfan]

So I shouldn't bother with my proposal on the trade board of our #1 pick to TOR for Carter Ashton and David Clarkson?

Other than the fact Ashton was traded a week or two ago to Tampa bay, go nuts.

The cap world is the only world I know of, live in or care about. The day I give a rip about Uncle Phil's money will be the day I stop caring about sports. Dean doesn't have to go to Phil about buyouts, just like he didn't have to go to him to okay the deal to get him in the first place.




You're entitled to your opinion. But my point was and still is, this is the type of deal the Kings would need to make involving Richards. Cap space deal, not a hockey deal. Dean's going to have to be creative at the deadline if he's a buyer. Meanwhile Richards has 9 points in 7 games in the "A" and may be playing his way back. We shall see.

The cap world might be the only world you 'care about' but the people that call the shots might care about something different. Dean may not have to go to Phil for a buyout, but you'd be foolish to think there isn't an internal budget someplace. DL does not have an unlimited bank account, this isn't the New York Yankees. DL may get the salary cap to spend to he may get more but he doesn't get to simply toss away money without it coming back on him eventually, just like any GM.

And yes, LA would need to make a deal like that to mover Richards. Minus the first. Name one time a team unloaded an ugly cap hit contract like Richards and in the process gained back a 1st round pick. In effect your trade is Jordan Weal and Mike Richards at $3.75 million for a 1st round pick. Would you be happy if DL traded our 1st for Dion Phanuef ($2 million retained) and Brendan Leipsic?

 

[Herby]

Other than the fact Ashton was traded a week or two ago to Tampa bay, go nuts.

smh

So out of the loop.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Not about points, never has been.

Richards has to demonstrate he can play a 200 foot game at the NHL level for someone to take him, his defensive play and "not being in the mood to check" is why he is in the AHL, not because he stopped scoring. Had he been able to contribute anything positive to the bottom six in either a defensive, physical or energy role he would still be with the Kings and not in Manchester.

NHL scouts and GM's who are scouting him aren't going to care how many points he puts up in the AHL. I would be curious to hear from CNS or others who have watched the games how he looks in the defensive zone or the physicality department, that is what gets MR back to the NHL.

I tend to agree especially with the defensive assessment but let's be real, if he weren't putting up points, people here would be all over him. The offensive side coming around as it should be is nice, but i'd love to hear about the defensive assignments as well.

The cap world might be the only world you 'care about' but the people that call the shots might care about something different. Dean may not have to go to Phil for a buyout, but you'd be foolish to think there isn't an internal budget someplace. DL does not have an unlimited bank account, this isn't the New York Yankees. DL may get the salary cap to spend to he may get more but he doesn't get to simply toss away money without it coming back on him eventually, just like any GM.

And yes, LA would need to make a deal like that to mover Richards. Minus the first. Name one time a team unloaded an ugly cap hit contract like Richards and in the process gained back a 1st round pick. In effect your trade is Jordan Weal and Mike Richards at $3.75 million for a 1st round pick. Would you be happy if DL traded our 1st for Dion Phanuef ($2 million retained) and Brendan Leipsic?

Maybe not directly, but Scott Gomez.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=432312

But agree with your overall point, just pointing out that it seems like every time Sather or someone else does something stupid/crippling, they seem to wiggle their way out of it.

 

[kingsfan]

I tend to agree especially with the defensive assessment but let's be real, if he weren't putting up points, people here would be all over him. The offensive side coming around as it should be is nice, but i'd love to hear about the defensive assignments as well.



Maybe not directly, but Scott Gomez.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=432312

But agree with your overall point, just pointing out that it seems like every time Sather or someone else does something stupid/crippling, they seem to wiggle their way out of it.

I think DL will wiggle out of it too, he's generally well above .500 overall so I have faith he'll find a way out.

And while I agree that Gomez deal was a slaughter, and was at the time it was done as well, Gomez was coming off a 58 point season, which was basically his NHL average at the time, when the deal was done, not in the minors after 15 points in 47 games.

 

[Herby]

I tend to agree especially with the defensive assessment but let's be real, if he weren't putting up points, people here would be all over him. The offensive side coming around as it should be is nice, but i'd love to hear about the defensive assignments as well.

People would be disappointed that he is an almost $6m a year third line center, but that is not unheard of in the NHL. Being a $6m a year AHL player is unheard of, the last one was Redden and that was a cap bury, this one isn't.

If MR were an effective third line center scoring 35 points a year but playing good two-way hockey and being physical (like he was before the collapse) I think the Kings could live with that, there would be no demotion, no buyout, no retention talk.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I think DL will wiggle out of it too, he's generally well above .500 overall so I have faith he'll find a way out.

And while I agree that Gomez deal was a slaughter, and was at the time it was done as well, Gomez was coming off a 58 point season, which was basically his NHL average at the time, when the deal was done, not in the minors after 15 points in 47 games.

Totally agree, the situations are different, just the first thing I could think of when I thought of 'untradeable contract.'

People would be disappointed that he is an almost $6m a year third line center, but that is not unheard of in the NHL. Being a $6m a year AHL player is unheard of, the last one was Redden and that was a cap bury, this one isn't.

If MR were an effective third line center scoring 35 points a year but playing good two-way hockey and being physical (like he was before the collapse) I think the Kings could live with that, there would be no demotion, no buyout, no retention talk.

Totally agree. But again, even though he's doing what he 'should' be doing production-wise in the AHL, that's more encouraging than the opposite, and if weren't actually scoring at all down there it would be even more damning. Could be a good confidence builder on that side of the puck too and the whole demotion thing may be a good deal in the long run for both team and player.

 

[Herby]

BD,

I know a lot of the talk on the main board was the Kings demoting him as some kind of wake-up call to MR or the team (which I think makes zero sense).

I think it was simply a hockey decision and the Kings felt Shore was a better fit at 4C. No big conspiracy or wake-up call, just a hockey decision.

 

[Thrice]

BD,

I know a lot of the talk on the main board was the Kings demoting him as some kind of wake-up call to MR or the team (which I think makes zero sense).

I think it was simply a hockey decision and the Kings felt Shore was a better fit at 4C. No big conspiracy or wake-up call, just a hockey decision.

This article and the quotes from Blake seem to suggest it's still a conditioning issue with Richards.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/kings/la-sp-la-kings-20150215-story.html

Still, the Kings are just as interested in what Richards is doing in his off-ice workouts, given that the American Hockey League schedule affords more time to incorporate training.

"That'll come. The one thing is he plays a lot of minutes down there," Blake said. "He's in all situations, penalty kill, the power play. They use him and they want him to continue."

It certainly makes sense. You can't undo years of poor training habits in one offseason.

 

[Herby]

Thrice,

Maybe it was conditioning that was causing him to be so awful, we don't really know, supposedly that was going to be addressed last summer and if that was the issue it wasn't addressed.

My point was, some are arguing that the Kings sent him down as some kind of wake-up call or even for financial reasons, which makes no sense since they are paying more in actual dollars and the same in cap dollars to have Shore up. What it ultimately comes down to is for their push to the playoffs the Kings management and coaches thought Shore gave them a better chance to win.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

I don't understand why it can't be both? I don't disagree with you really, though.