Mike Richards IV: Started From The Bottom, Still Here *MOD WARNING Post #194*

[kingsfan]

If Richards isn't good enough to play on the Kings' roster or be traded, that's exactly what you do.

It is not as simplistic as this. AEG isn't going to say here's $20 million to get rid of Mike Richards and here's $XXX more to sign/trade for someone to replace him. It may happen, but it is not going to be a cake walk and it certainly isn't going to be viewed in a vacuum as you suggest.

Look at the Clarkson/Horton situation. Columbus was paying for Horton's salary because it wasn't insured, they told Kekellainen to turn that money into a player that is actually producing, so he dealt Horton away for a 4th liner in Clarkson just so he could have a player that actually plays for that amount of money. Made zero sense cap wise, but to ownership it was a more palatable situation.

AEG's pockets only go as deep as they want them to go. If AEG demands that Richards be traded to get a player rather than paying to buy him out, it will happen, even if that means shipping out a 1st rounder, a prospect like Forbort or even a roster player like Toffoli and Pearson. There will be a magic number on a Richards buy out and anything over that number AEG will simply say no too. If DL says it'll cost $20 million to buy out Richards and the guy we want to bring in is on a four year deal with $11 million remaining, that is a combined $31 million commitment DL is asking for from AEG. I can easily see them declining such a request and telling DL to find a more cost effective way to get rid of Richards, which will mean eating a portion of his salary or adding in a player(s), or both.

The issue is way to involved to simply say Richards can't play for the Kings, buy him out.

Whether you guys believe it or not, John Hoven and Jon Rosen have reported over and over teams are STILL interested.

We don't know as much as they do.

I am sure teams like Calgary, Toronto, Edmonton, etc. would be willing to take a Mike Richards at 2-3 million as a mentor in the rebuild. None of those teams have a legit #2 center, Calgary really doesn't even have a #1.

Of course teams are still interested. I bet a lot of teams are.

They are more interested though in what they can get out of LA to take on that deal rather than Richards himself. If it can get them a kid like Toffoli, or Pearson, or even a top end prospect like Kempe, they'll listen because they are really interested in that pick or player, not Richards himself.

 

[onlyalad]

That would have happened at the deadline(if teams were interested in just salary retained), Lombardi was offering 30% retained(rumored) plus a pick probably.

No one took it.

Also people keep bringing up EDM, they are not interested. Their GM even said so. Hell Mac T is not even sure he wants to resign Derek Roy, who has been the Oilers best Center since he got there.

Don't believe every you read about what was offered.
I think we will see Richards soon.

 

[sinister6000]

Might as well call him up. If the kings make the playoffs, and he plays well the Kings could trade him in the off season. Or not trade him.

 

[moosehead81]

Might as well call him up. If the kings make the playoffs, and he plays well the Kings could trade him in the off season. Or not trade him.

The play-offs are not a given but the Kings must feel that they don't need him to make it. However, there might be some criticism if, at the end, they fell a point or two out without having called him up and used him. Who knows what the thinking is?

Given the circumstances, I also would think it would be as difficult for the player (and maybe the team?) for him to go back as it was to originally leave. It's turned into a mess IMO, and you might not see MR in a Kings' jersey again.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

A) A trade would obviously be the best solution for the Kings. Who wants Richards?

Of course buying out Richards' contract would make things better in the immediate future. It lowers the cap hit of his contract immediately and spreads out the damage over a number of years.

B) Not even sure what "phantom cap space" is in your mind, but much more in cap space is being wasted in Manchester right now.

C) A buy out would suck, but it's a better option than paying Richards to play in Manchester, or have him play for the Kings with the way he was performing this season.

BTW, Lombardi decided with his heart and not his head that he would not buy out Richards' contract last summer. Now Lombardi has to wait until this summer for the next buy out period. One way or another Richards time with the Kings is likely over.

If Dean can trade Richards without retaining salary he really is a wizard, jedi master, whatever other mythological creature you can think of that can trick humans into doing stupid stuff. You really can't believe that is a possibility, but maybe you do, and that really is laughable.

Phantom cap space is 4 million in a few years for absolutely no return at all. Never did I say Richards in the AHL was worth his contract.

If Lombardi thought a buyout was feasible at all he would have done that already. Quick, name all the Cup winning teams with significant chunks of buyout money counting against their cap. There are none.

What's more absurd is this notion that Richards has negative value, when that directly contradicts everything we've heard from reputable news sources. Mike Richards value as a hockey player does not equate to his value in a cap world with his contract, and I can all but guarantee you haven't even watched a Manchester game of him yet. He doesn't belong in that league. It's very clear.

What you don't seem to understand is that Richards situation on the Los Angeles Kings is one unique to almost every other team in the league. And because Richards, at his massive cap hit, clears waivers in the middle of a season, you assume "no team wants him." Again, you're missing the forest through the trees. In fact, you're missing the forest, as well. Just because no team is willing to take on his salary WITHOUT SENDING ANYTHING BACK doesn't mean no team wants him. GMs function on an entirely different plane in the offseason than they do game 30 of the regular season. Teams have the flexibility to look at contracts differently in June than they do in November.

My point in all this is that a buyout is a terrible idea. You saddle this team with a fluctuating cap hit for another 10 years and you kiss our Cup window goodbye. And thankfully Lombardi sees that as well.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Can the personal stuff guys. We're thousands of posts deep and you know I'm itching to kill the thread

 

[Buddy The Elf]

Why was there a window for the compliance buyouts? I'm curious why they wouldn't allow an existing contract from the old CBA to be bought out at a later time. Maybe there is some possibility of a cap circumvention if there wasn't a window?

 

[Captain Mittens*]

Why was there a window for the compliance buyouts? I'm curious why they wouldn't allow an existing contract from the old CBA to be bought out at a later time. Maybe there is some possibility of a cap circumvention if there wasn't a window?

Hell of a question man

 

[Herby]

Doesn't have negative value, huh?

Every single team had a chance to claim him for free, none did. In what planet is that not negative value? The rumored teams interested in him are expecting significant assets to be included in the deal as well as salary retained. When Calgary was interested, do you honestly think it was Richards they wanted or Toffoli?

You an't just pretend his contract doesn't exist like you are trying to do. In a cap world everyone is tied to their contract. But again as has been pointed out numerous times, the Kings don't gain anything financially by having Shore in plae of Richards, in fact they lose money. So obviously it's a hockey decision why he is in Manchester, one made by DL and Sutter.

Why was there a window for the compliance buyouts? I'm curious why they wouldn't allow an existing contract from the old CBA to be bought out at a later time. Maybe there is some possibility of a cap circumvention if there wasn't a window?

I think it was negotiated as a one time (or technically two time) use to get out from awful contracts that were signed under the old CBA. Certainly some teams used it on deals that weren't potential cap killers but it was really negotiated with deals like MR's and Lecavalier's in mind. I don't think they wanted teams to get more useable years out of guys like Hossa and Richards (two guys who should have been bought out) before buying them out. It just sucks for us because obviously if there were a third year it's an even bigger no-brainer than the second year should have been. Like I was telling K17, it's really unfortunate for DL because he has done almost everything right since the deadline of 2012 and with almost $6m from MR in addition to expiring contracts on declining players Stoll and Williams and Toffoli and Pearson still on undervalued contracts the Kings really could have made some noise in improving the team this summer, but it's hard when you have all this cap space wasted on an AHL player. Literally one bad move by DL is like a single drop of oil in a perfectly clean jug of water.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Doesn't have negative value, huh?

Every single team had a chance to claim him for free, none did. The rumored teams interested in him are expecting significant assets to be included in the deal as well as salary retained.

In what planet is that not negative value?

You an't just pretend his contract doesn't exist like you are trying to do.

It seems like semantics at this point and I'm not disagreeing with you really but the "negative value" thing is something the TO fans on the trade board throw around...I disagree with it because I don't think we can really evaluate that until something happens or not. It would be the first time in history significant assets get thrown out with a contract, and I don't think that's going to happen. I've long said pick one: bad contract coming back, salary retained, pick, prospect. That's what will be included to ship Richards out. Maybe two if it's minor, like 10% retained and a low pick.

But I still think DL is taking the calculated gamble of letting Richards recapture his game. It's almost inevitable that he gets called back up. Whether that means DL hangs onto him long term or tries to move him while he can has yet to be seen though.

Oh, and passing through waivers doesn't signal death, see Derek Roy.

Why was there a window for the compliance buyouts? I'm curious why they wouldn't allow an existing contract from the old CBA to be bought out at a later time. Maybe there is some possibility of a cap circumvention if there wasn't a window?

Because it was a chance for teams to deal with pre-lockout contracts in contrast with a falling cap. basically a transition period to deal with new contract era where you couldn't do the 20-year contract, etc.

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2014/06/15/compliance-buyout-process-begins-monday/

Edit: What Herby said makes a ton of sense, shouldn't be allowed to squeeze more value out of those contracts before buying them out.

 

[Buddy The Elf]

I think it was negotiated as a one time (or technically two time) use to get out from awful contracts that were signed under the old CBA. Certainly some teams used it on deals that weren't potential cap killers but it was really negotiated with deals like MR's and Lecavalier's in mind. I don't think they wanted teams to get more useable years out of guys like Hossa and Richards (two guys who should have been bought out) before buying them out. It just sucks for us because obviously if there were a third year it's an even bigger no-brainer than the second year should have been. Like I was telling K17, it's really unfortunate for DL because he has done almost everything right since the deadline of 2012 and with almost $6m from MR in addition to expiring contracts on declining players Stoll and Williams and Toffoli and Pearson still on undervalued contracts the Kings really could have made some noise in improving the team this summer, but it's hard when you have all this cap space wasted on an AHL player. Literally one bad move by DL is like a single drop of oil in a perfectly clean jug of water.

That makes sense. Well, I know you aren't optimistic but who knows, maybe DL can pull out some wizardry. I'm sure you cringe at the thought of it but since for better or worse the Kings are stuck with him, I can see DL evaluating Mike at the end of the year and possibly bringing him back next year with an attempt the reclaim some semblance of an NHL player. If he were able to turn his game around, the Kings might be able to move him and maybe even not retain salary. That might not be realistic but if Scott Gomez got moved and Shawn Horcoff got moved, I still think there is a chance they can get out from it. We'll see. There are a lot of moving parts with the Cap situation between Voynov, RFA's, UFA's and now Sekera. Trying to look at this Richards situation in a vacuum is difficult. I know you guys want him just to be bought out but I'm not so certain DL is completely sold on the idea given the implications down the line. Of course, he might not even have plans to be here when that becomes a real issue.

 

[KINGS17]

Never did I say Richards in the AHL was worth his contract.

a Mike Richards at PPG in Manchester mentoring the prospects at his salary is worth more than 2-3 million in empty cap space until the year 3000. If Lombardi thought a buyout was a reasonable idea at all he would have done it already.

Uh yes, you did. Since, Richards being in the AHL does very little to help the Kings' cap space, you essentially said Richards playing in the AHL is worth his current salary.

The buy out hasn't already occurred because Dean trusted Richards to fix whatever his issues were during last summer, and he didn't get it done for whatever reasons. Now Dean has to wait until this summer to take care of the Richards situation. I hope he can do it via the trade market, but I doubt that any team wants Richards with his current contract, even if 50% is retained by the Kings. Not unless we're giving up one of Toffoli, Pearson, Forbort, Shore, etc. in the deal. That is why Richards has negative value at this point in time. It's like having to throw in a Cadillac to get someone to buy an Edsel.

Dean screwed up, and I may have given him the benefit of the doubt at the time, but I am on record here as saying that the compliance buy out was the move with the least amount of risk and is what I wanted to see happen.

 

[Bandit]

It amazes me this topic has more posts than the Voynov situation and is still going strong.

 

[KINGS17]

It amazes me this topic has more posts than the Voynov situation and is still going strong.

Nothing can be done about the Voynov situation until the trial is over.

 

[CowMix]

It would have been awesome if there wasn't a window on the compliance buyouts. Can you imagine their trade value in today's NHL?

 

[Buddy The Elf]

Nothing can be done about the Voynov situation until the trial is over.

Nothing can be done about Richards until the season is over.

 

[Herby]

I think everyone knows the Voynov situation wasn't really created by the team or by play on the ice.

I think Voynov has one of two ways of ending, either he is convicted, deported and the Kings are able to void his contract or he returns and assumes his old role. Not really to much to discuss until a verdict.

The Richards situation for one could have easily been resolved last summer with one move, a move that was highly debated on this board at the time. It also isn't an off ice issue, we got to this point because Richards game collapsed and there are multiple ways that it could end. Trade, Buyout, return to form, finishing up in AHL. It has many ways to end so it's discussed more.

 

[CowMix]

Well Richards does have one off ice issue: hitting the gym. If he worked out like Jagr, he would still be on our second line.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Warned everyone to play nice, but spent the better part of the afternoon cleaning up. Cut it out.

Closed for the night--will re-open after the game. Let this be a standing warning. Anyone who wants to continue commenting on the mod team, threadworthiness, or otherwise, send us a PM, or further garbage is just going to result in infractions and threadbans.

Thanks.

If you're sick of seeing this thread, just do yourself a favor:

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Thread is open again. Please heed the above warning. I'm going to get a shake and fries to dip in it. Carry on.

 

[417th]

Chocolate shake

And then maybe a cherry one.

Has anyone ever had a date shake?

I did.

Weirded me out.

Turned out she was just really cold but I never want to see that again.


They used to sell date shakes at santas village up by Rincon pt area towards santa barbara. They were really good.

 

[Little Psycho]

I miss Richie yelling at the refs and drawing calls during PK's but that's it.

 

[CNS]

RP getting threads locked again. Ban.

 

[417th]

Who is Mike Richards again? I lost track of him back in the first chapter. Was he a goaler? I think he was a goaler.

 

[Trolfoli]

As for vancouver versus LA's line up, I'll stick with the one with the cup rings for now thanks.

The point I was trying to make about Vancouver was them sitting in a playoff spot while having a crap lineup. At least I think... May have been late

RP getting threads locked again. Ban.

Damn... Missed it...

Nothing can be done about Richards until the season is over.

Yeah I don't get why people are still complaining about his cap hit being stuck in the AHL.... Trade deadline came and went... the top line winger is going to be one of Brown/Lewis/Pearson.... May need to accept this for the time being, as it is unlikely to change before the summer. Man a winger like Iggy would have given the Kings a nice line up.... didn't have the space... got to win with what they got.