Mike Richards VI (UGH): The Armageddon Edition (MOD NOTE POST #1)

[Ron*]

Sure it does, but that was an exaggeration, we can probably safely assume he wasn't bring in a truck full of drugs. Either way, unless he is a secret Colombian drug lord, there isn't much in the way of drug crimes that will justify terminating his contract.

This HAS to be a slam dunk example for this to pass. There is zero chance this passes unless it is unanimous. There is no way this precedent will be allowed to stand over something as small as 'caught with painkillers at the border'. You can purge so many contracts from your books if that is the bar you are setting this at.

Dean will also have to address why Voynov has the right to his contract and to stay with the Kings over Richards, and that will be a massive hurdle against the NHLPA. These rights to players are congruent, if the Kings choose not to cite Voynov as having breached their own rules governing conduct, then saying Richards has is climbing a legal Everest.

Do you have any ideas how many lawyers for both the Kings and the NHL must have been consulted in order for a contract of this magnitude to be terminated with high confidence?

You are basically saying this was a fly-by-night decision. I'm here to to tell you no way. No way of knowing also, but I bet 2nd and 3rd opinions were obtained from both in-house and outside counsel were consulted.

 

[The Butcher]

Slightly off topic, but is anyone else as concerned like I am about just who else has a drug issue? I mean these guys hang out all the time together, especially during the season. I know they are adults and are responsible for their own actions, but I think peer pressure would play a role as well? To me Stoll and Richards i could see having an alcohol problem, but would have never guessed they would have been involved in drugs of any kind.....

Really? These are pro athletes, not Mormon missionaries.

I think some of you hold these guys to unrealistic expectations. I've known plenty of athletes and more than half of them love to party.

 

[Chain]

Sure it does, but that was an exaggeration, we can probably safely assume he wasn't bring in a truck full of drugs. Either way, unless he is a secret Colombian drug lord, there isn't much in the way of drug crimes that will justify terminating his contract.

This HAS to be a slam dunk example for this to pass. There is zero chance this passes unless it is unanimous. There is no way this precedent will be allowed to stand over something as small as 'caught with painkillers at the border'. You can purge so many contracts from your books if that is the bar you are setting this at.

Dean will also have to address why Voynov has the right to his contract and to stay with the Kings over Richards, and that will be a massive hurdle against the NHLPA. These rights to players are congruent, if the Kings choose not to cite Voynov as having breached their own rules governing conduct, then saying Richards has is climbing a legal Everest.

They already have a potential reason. The Kings knew about the incident with Voynov almost immediately. Richards deliberately kept the information of his incident from the team for over 2 weeks, might've been trying to hide it indefinitely (we don't know who told Lombardi) and this was during a period where a lot of movement goes on, so he may have adversely affected the team's ability to trade his contract as is their right. So they may not be able to terminate his contract on the drug charges directly, but they might be able to terminate it on that.

 

[santiclaws]

That's the world of law. Precedent is extremely important. The sports all feed off of the same precedent. 30 years ago and different sport won't matter.

The decision of an arbitrator sets no legal precedent and has no effect on the law whatsoever. Zero. Same sport or different sport. His argument may be persuasive, then again, it may not. An arbitrator has the absolute right to completely disregard prior arbitration decisions.

By the way, Bob Probert.

 

[Telos]

First of all, a small amount of cocaine for personal use is not "trafficking." We don't know if Richards had enough to be charged with intent to distribute. Second, Hoyt was nearly thirty years ago and the laws have changed, not to mention the fact that Hoyt's arrest would not prevent him from doing his job, unlike Richards' arrest which could prevent him from entering the U.S. Third, a prior decision by an arbitrator has no binding effect on anyone. Another arbitrator is free to make his own decision without paying any attention whatsoever to any other ruling by any other arbitrator. Fourth, Richards did not inform his employer about his arrest in an apparent attempt to ensure he got his millions. That in itself is a potential violation of the morals clause sufficient to warrant termination of his contract. Fifth, his conduct undermined his employer's attempt to trade him, thus directly affecting its interests. Sixth, the contract language in Hoyt's contract was no doubt different than the contract language in Richards' contract. Seventh, we have no idea if Richards has previously been warned/counseled etc. regarding his drug use.

That's just off the top of my head. I'm sure a bunch of good lawyers will think of a dozen other reasons why his contract termination should be upheld.

Is there a guarantee that an arbitrator will agree with the Kings? No. But saying that the Kings don't have a good argument to make is ludicrous.

They would have to have a pretty biased arbitrator if he/she is going to ignore precedent. This is the exact reason why everything in the universe is about to be thrown at the Kings to keep this case from going through. If there was any miracle that this termination is upheld, then anyone can cite this case, just like anyone can cite Hoyt's case. The law is expected to be objective and fair. We don't know the facts, but if what we think we know is true then they need an incredible ace up their sleeve that proves that Richards deserves his money taken away from him while others in the past kept theirs. It is mind-boggling to think the Kings have that ace, it is very unlikely.

 

[Reclamation Project]

Lombardi and Solomon are the tip of the iceberg. You can bet the Kings had an entire fleet of lawyers examining every angle with a fine tooth comb. They wouldn't take the nuclear route without watertight evidence.

 

[Chain]

That's the world of law. Precedent is extremely important. The sports all feed off of the same precedent. 30 years ago and different sport won't matter.

You're talking about border laws pre-9/11 and post-9/11. It may matter.

 

[Telos]

Do you have any ideas how many lawyers for both the Kings and the NHL must have been consulted in order for a contract of this magnitude to be terminated with high confidence?

You are basically saying this was a fly-by-night decision. I'm here to to tell you no way. No way of knowing also, but I bet 2nd and 3rd opinions were obtained from both in-house and outside counsel were consulted.

The NHL isn't the judge. They are just upholding the Kings' CBA right to file for contract termination. They will also uphold the NHLPA's right to utterly destroy them in their appeal.

They already have a potential reason. The Kings knew about the incident with Voynov almost immediately. Richards deliberately kept the information of his incident from the team for over 2 weeks, might've been trying to hide it indefinitely (we don't know who told Lombardi) and this was during a period where a lot of movement goes on, so he may have adversely affected the team's ability to trade his contract as is their right. So they may not be able to terminate his contract on the drug charges directly, but they might be able to terminate it on that.

We have no idea of anything like that, it is all speculation right now, but simply lying or being held at a border still would be tall reasons to throw out a player's contract.

The decision of an arbitrator sets no legal precedent and has no effect on the law whatsoever. Zero. Same sport or different sport. His argument may be persuasive, then again, it may not. An arbitrator has the absolute right to completely disregard prior arbitration decisions.

Somewhat, but the arbitrator isn't going to be someone off the street from jury duty. My educational backround is law, and while I am not saying I have any definitive or advanced say here, what I will say is there is zero percent chance that precedent is ignored regardless of what sport was involved or when it occurred.

You're talking about border laws pre-9/11 and post-9/11. It may matter.

Perhaps, especially if you guys are hoping passport issues will save us capspace, but we will just have to wait and see.

Lombardi and Solomon are the tip of the iceberg. You can bet the Kings had an entire fleet of lawyers examining every angle with a fine tooth comb. They wouldn't take the nuclear route without watertight evidence.

They will need that and a golden gun to get by the NHLPA on this one. Not saying they can't, part of me hopes they can like many staring at our numbers, but boy is it hard. You are taking someone's contracted money away, this is a tough climb.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

Slightly off topic, but is anyone else as concerned like I am about just who else has a drug issue? I mean these guys hang out all the time together, especially during the season. I know they are adults and are responsible for their own actions, but I think peer pressure would play a role as well? To me Stoll and Richards i could see having an alcohol problem, but would have never guessed they would have been involved in drugs of any kind.....

I am old, not as old a Ron, but old. Every decision I made was always mine. I never tried any drug or did a bad thing because I was around certain people. Yes, certain friends can bring out the worst in us but they don't turn you in to something that you aren't.*










*the only exception here is when you are thinking with the wrong head because of a female

 

[KingsFan7824]

So yeah. Mike better have had 6000 pills and 62k in cash for this to result in termination.

I can't fathom trying to stop a player from receiving millions of dollars over a bottle of pills.

Just my opinion but this is going to get bad for the Kings I think.

Right, which is why it's totally worth the effort to do this, on the chance that it gets bad for the organization. Not just the organization, but Lombardi himself. His reputation is on the line. Of all the players, and all the contracts in the world, he picks this one, at this time of the year, to do what? Save a few million over 10 years? Is Lombardi that desperate to get rid of the contract? To go to this length? With the entire hockey world watching? It's not like he's sneaking anything by anyone. Risking an unneeded battle between the league and PA? For extra cap space 4 years from now?

I'm not saying Lombardi isn't trying to take advantage of a possible situation, to get rid of a contract that isn't good. But there has to be something. Lombardi isn't an idiot. He knows his history. Terminating a contract isn't a simple process apparently.

 

[Omni Owl]

Damnit Robitaillle, you just had to say on celebration day that these guys deserved to party all summer...

 

[Face Wash]

I am old, not as old a Ron, but old. Every decision I made was always mine. I never tried any drug or did a bad thing because I was around certain people. Yes, certain friends can bring out the worst in us but they don't turn you in to something that you aren't.*










*the only exception here is when you are thinking with the wrong head because of a female

Or under the influence of Hot Wings.

 

[kingsholygrail]

Right, which is why it's totally worth the effort to do this, on the chance that it gets bad for the organization. Not just the organization, but Lombardi himself. His reputation is on the line. Of all the players, and all the contracts in the world, he picks this one, at this time of the year, to do what? Save a few million over 10 years? Is Lombardi that desperate to get rid of the contract? To go to this length? With the entire hockey world watching? It's not like he's sneaking anything by anyone. Risking an unneeded battle between the league and PA? For extra cap space 4 years from now?

Uhm, the termed contract is 1.3mil recapture for remainder of his contract(5 years).

Regular buyout is 14mil out of pocket plus 10 years of variable cap hits including two years at close to 5mil.

So no, it's not just trying to save chump change.

 

[Captain Mittens*]

Uhm, the termed contract is 1.3mil recapture for remainder of his contract(5 years).

Regular buyout is 14mil out of pocket plus 10 years of variable cap hits including two years at close to 5mil.

So no, it's not just trying to save chump change.

Plus it saves real dollars and that is good for the environment.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Perhaps it is an exaggeration, but leagues have already lost trying to terminate contracts over drug trafficking, it isn't enough to justify termination:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericmac...he-termination-of-the-mike-richards-contract/

The Kings will obviously argue that a trafficking charge in the 80s in the MLB was a different circumstance.

And like many have said, that's likely not what prompted Lombardi to term the contract. The more I think about it, the more obvious it becomes that Team Richards attempted to gag order this mess until he got his big pay day.

Lombardi has a bonafide case for termination if he has proof of it. The American public hasn't exactly been fond of cover ups in recent years...

 

[Face Wash]

Plus it saves real dollars and that is good for the environment.

****in' tree hugger.

 

[HookKing]

Right, which is why it's totally worth the effort to do this, on the chance that it gets bad for the organization. Not just the organization, but Lombardi himself. His reputation is on the line. Of all the players, and all the contracts in the world, he picks this one, at this time of the year, to do what? Save a few million over 10 years? Is Lombardi that desperate to get rid of the contract? To go to this length? With the entire hockey world watching? It's not like he's sneaking anything by anyone. Risking an unneeded battle between the league and PA? For extra cap space 4 years from now?

I'm not saying Lombardi isn't trying to take advantage of a possible situation, to get rid of a contract that isn't good. But there has to be something. Lombardi isn't an idiot. He knows his history. Terminating a contract isn't a simple process apparently.

Its the betrayal. That Sicilian thing.

 

[Bandit]

I am old, not as old a Ron, but old. Every decision I made was always mine. I never tried any drug or did a bad thing because I was around certain people. Yes, certain friends can bring out the worst in us but they don't turn you in to something that you aren't.*










*the only exception here is when you are thinking with the wrong head because of a female

Yeah, I hate it when my brain gets in the way of my Johnson...

Seriously though, this is bananas. It would be super helpful if the first post of the current thread could contain a "what we know for sure" blurb since it's hard to keep up. If you red the main board he did everything from murder his girlfriend that left him to smuggling a sock monkey full of twinkies across and international border by shoving it up his left nostril.

 

[Chain]

Really? These are pro athletes, not Mormon missionaries.

I think some of you hold these guys to unrealistic expectations. I've known plenty of athletes and more than half of them love to party.

I have a problem with it. I've known a ton of athletes. I know they're not going to be saints and I don't expect them to be. I also would be surprised if someone else still on the team is partying like Stoll and Richards were. I wish they'd stick with a reasonable amount of alcohol and banging loose women. I don't approve of them doing hardcore drugs at all, but I'm not naïve enough to think it doesn't happen. It's going to happen to some extent and I accept that. I've got friends and family who've done the same and they're not all bad people or anything like that.

But there's a difference between someone doing it, and doing it and not being able to handle their "partying" to the point that it becomes obvious to the public and/or a detriment to their job. I like to drive fast. Sometimes I go a little over the speed limit. But I haven't had a ticket in over a decade and I don't drive over the speed limit to the point that I become wreckless and crash into other vehicles or get caught by a cop and hauled into jail. I also like naked women. But I don't want hardcore porn all over network tv for a 5 year old to see. I like horror movies but again, I don't want my 4 year old watching Saw III. Do you see the difference? It's not just whether or not they do it that's the problem. It's discretion, or lack thereof and if it's affect on their performance. If I'm an owner or a fan and a player is getting paid millions of dollars, if he's out partying he better still be able to play at a high level otherwise I'm not going to be happy about it, and rightfully so. If it's all over the news cuz he can't keep it under control, I'm not going to be happy about it, and rightfully so. All I ask is use some discretion and don't do it to the point it affects your job performance. Some may not agree with society's current drug laws and say they're wrong, and I can see an argument for that. But the people expressing such a view should also realize that the society that creates & maintains those drug laws they don't agree with is the same society that pays these guys millions of dollars to put a puck in a net. Let's have some perspective over who is in a fortunate position here. Society is a double-edged sword/a two-way street, and all that jazz.

Richards had plenty of chances and he blew it. I don't want him to burn in hell or anything cruel. I want him to get help and hope in the end he lives a happy life. But I also want him off the team and hopefully with a terminated contract.

 

[Chain]

I am old, not as old a Ron, but old. Every decision I made was always mine. I never tried any drug or did a bad thing because I was around certain people. Yes, certain friends can bring out the worst in us but they don't turn you in to something that you aren't.*

*the only exception here is when you are thinking with the wrong head because of a female

That still leaves a wide range of old.

 

[Papa Mocha 15]

It's a Schedule I in Canada.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-38.8/page-24.html#h-28

Ha! Stand corrected. Serves me right thinking on the American side only of things. LOL.

 

[Quattro]

If true, I hope Richards gets the help he needs. Hopefully the team pulls together through all of this.

This. Just a sad situation all around.

 

[Bandit]

I feel bad for Dean Lombardi, how many more of his players will continue to betray him? The more I think about it the more aggravating the whole thing is.

Seriously, yet there's 1000s of ****ers calling for his head like he's some evil robot. Sad, really.

this. In the end... Mike screwed Mike

For sure. I've made some boneheaded mistakes in my life, but none in the 14 million + range... Jesus.

 

[theMajor]

what if Dean had a deal in place, called Richards' agent to confirm, and then his agent broke the news about the border thing? not saying its likely, but man would that suck

 

[KingsFan7824]

Uhm, the termed contract is 1.3mil recapture for remainder of his contract(5 years).

Regular buyout is 14mil out of pocket plus 10 years of variable cap hits including two years at close to 5mil.

So no, it's not just trying to save chump change.

And again, this is something that Lombardi is willing to risk his reputation for? I'm going to assume, fully aware of what it means if he doesn't have something to back up this course of action? Dragging a player through the mud, dragging the league into a fight with the PA, and an all around devil may care attitude toward the CBA? Just because he was a stupid sucker last summer? It's possible.