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

[moosehead81]

He knows more than anyone on HF

I wouldn't bet my bank account on that but lets leave it there, shall we?

 

[mouser]

The CBA doesn't have any specific information on the cap and terminations, so it's going to be more along the lines of did he or did he not honor the spirit of his contract and to what extent. That may release the team of their cap for that player, but maybe not all the salary.

As for cap circumvention, why would the PA even bring that up? All they care about is the player getting his money. The best possible outcome as far as the PA is concerned is Richards getting money equal to or more than his buyout, and his salary not counting against the cap so it can be spent on a different union member. Any way to get more dollars in the system will be just fine by them.

I doubt they will worry too much about termination of contracts in the future, it will be a very rare occurence and very difficult to pull off (as it should be). The player will have to do something pretty bad just for a GM to consider it. And if the player still likely gets a chunk of money anyways in spite of their stupidity, they really aren't going to fight it.

I expect this will all be amended into the CBA.

I disagree with this premise. The PA cares about getting Richards his money. But they also care about all their other union members not being under risk of having their contracts terminated in the future.

Those two differing priorities can sometimes result in unusual cases where the union takes a position different then the "wronged" union member in a grievance. One hypothetical scenario being Richards okay with a buyout, but the PA not okay with that because they don't want to create a precedent where teams that fail in terminating player contracts can then do buyouts outside of the CBA mandated periods.

 

[onlyalad]

Who said he had pills?

Do you really think, even for a second, that the Kings would terminate his $22 MM contract for the scenario you just laid out?

Not a snowball's chance in hell.

I don't
I am stating that that is the opinion of many. That is why I think there has to be more.

 

[KINGS17]

I'm not sure how having non-guaranteed contracts cuts cost. The players are still guaranteed 50% of all HRR. How does going to the NFL model save the owners money? In the NFL model, owners are still on the hook for a signing bonus if the player is cut. So they cut the player, pay him out and then have to replace him on the roster.

Where do the savings come in?

I doesn't cut costs. It simply allows the owners to re-distribute the money to the employees that are getting the job done on the ice.

Why do you think the NFL owners like contracts where they can cut a player? NFL owners only take some of the cap hit when they cut a player. A guy gets cut, he no longer gets paid anything over his guaranteed money which is far short of the total contract. After a player is cut, the owner goes out and signs a better, younger, cheaper player.

 

[KINGS17]

Be ready for a multi year lockout if you think that is going to happen.
The NFL is the only league that doesn't have guaranteed contracts.

The owners have this type of resolve. It's already been shown that the players don't. I don't think the guys that have big money contracts are going to miss two years of getting paid.

The players lost their leverage when Fehr pulled the BS move when he represented the MLB players and had them go on strike at the end of a season which ended up canceling the playoffs and World Series. The owners lost a lot of money in that situation.

Now the owners just lock the players out and no one gets paid. The owners will always have the ability to outlast the players in that situation.

 

[tsanuri]

The owners have this type of resolve. It's already been shown that the players don't. I don't think the guys that have big money contracts are going to miss two years of getting paid.

If they try and make contacts where they are not guaranteed it will be a blood bath on both sides.
I don't even see it being brought up unless they want to make some other very serious concessions.

 

[KINGS17]

If they try and make contacts where they are not guaranteed it will be a blood bath on both sides.
I don't even see it being brought up unless they want to make some other very serious concessions.

How so?

As always, when it's a lockout the owner's have the upper hand. I think it will definitely be brought up. The owners used the NFL 50/50 split of revenue model on the players last time. Next up is the big battle over guaranteed contracts, unless you can give me a good reason that a player deserves to get all of his money when he signs an 8-year deal and only performs well in the first 3 years of that deal.

 

[Buddy The Elf]

How so?

As always, when it's a lockout the owner's have the upper hand. I think it will definitely be brought up. The owners used the NFL 50/50 split of revenue model on the players last time. Next up is the big battle over guaranteed contracts, unless you can give me a good reason that a player deserves to get all of his money when he signs an 8-year deal and only performs well in the first 3 years of that deal.

That's a two way street. Nobody is holding a gun to the owners heads telling them to hand out those contracts. Your scenario is a bit of a slippery slope. If you are concerned about a player's ability deteriorating that fast, then maybe you shouldn't sign them to that long of a deal? It's like the owners can't help themselves. They basically have to set up rules to prevent them from making mistakes.

I don't disagree with what you say about the owners having more resolve than the players. They likely do. But the one thing I can tell you is the damage MLB did to it's brand with the labor stoppages in the 90's is real. My Dad refuses to go to a game to this day. I know plenty of other people from his generation that feel the same. I can trace my indifference to baseball back to around that time. Although, I'm not actively boycotting MLB. I just simply lost interest around that time.

I fear the another prolonged work stoppage would have a similar effect on hockey. You sit out two full years for this **** again and I'd probably take a while off. A lot can happen between now and the next CBA so I guess we'll see what happens.

 

[bob77]

I disagree with this premise. The PA cares about getting Richards his money. But they also care about all their other union members not being under risk of having their contracts terminated in the future.

Those two differing priorities can sometimes result in unusual cases where the union takes a position different then the "wronged" union member in a grievance. One hypothetical scenario being Richards okay with a buyout, but the PA not okay with that because they don't want to create a precedent where teams that fail in terminating player contracts can then do buyouts outside of the CBA mandated periods.

Go back a few posts. Me and you agree completely.

 

[moosehead81]

That's a two way street. Nobody is holding a gun to the owners heads telling them to hand out those contracts. Your scenario is a bit of a slippery slope. If you are concerned about a player's ability deteriorating that fast, then maybe you shouldn't sign them to that long of a deal? It's like the owners can't help themselves. They basically have to set up rules to prevent them from making mistakes.

I don't disagree with what you say about the owners having more resolve than the players. They likely do. But the one thing I can tell you is the damage MLB did to it's brand with the labor stoppages in the 90's is real. My Dad refuses to go to a game to this day. I know plenty of other people from his generation that feel the same. I can trace my indifference to baseball back to around that time. Although, I'm not actively boycotting MLB. I just simply lost interest around that time.

I fear the another prolonged work stoppage would have a similar effect on hockey. You sit out two full years for this **** again and I'd probably take a while off. A lot can happen between now and the next CBA so I guess we'll see what happens.

Man I'm definitely with you. I know its a little off topic but there's lots of other interesting hockey to watch and other things to do if the NHL and NHLPA went crazy next time.

 

[bob77]

How so?

As always, when it's a lockout the owner's have the upper hand. I think it will definitely be brought up. The owners used the NFL 50/50 split of revenue model on the players last time. Next up is the big battle over guaranteed contracts, unless you can give me a good reason that a player deserves to get all of his money when he signs an 8-year deal and only performs well in the first 3 years of that deal.

I can see players still having guaranteed contracts, but how the "cut" from the team model might be structured to impact the cap differently. The players are going to say fix how your cap works if that is the real problem.

 

[KINGS17]

That's a two way street. Nobody is holding a gun to the owners heads telling them to hand out those contracts. Your scenario is a bit of a slippery slope. If you are concerned about a player's ability deteriorating that fast, then maybe you shouldn't sign them to that long of a deal? It's like the owners can't help themselves. They basically have to set up rules to prevent them from making mistakes.

I don't disagree with what you say about the owners having more resolve than the players. They likely do. But the one thing I can tell you is the damage MLB did to it's brand with the labor stoppages in the 90's is real. My Dad refuses to go to a game to this day. I know plenty of other people from his generation that feel the same. I can trace my indifference to baseball back to around that time. Although, I'm not actively boycotting MLB. I just simply lost interest around that time.

I fear the another prolonged work stoppage would have a similar effect on hockey. You sit out two full years for this **** again and I'd probably take a while off. A lot can happen between now and the next CBA so I guess we'll see what happens.

From the owner's perspective when have any of their wants or desires regarding a new CBA been about anything other than protecting themselves from their own stupidity?

A lot of fans would make a lot of noise about hating the owners and they'll never go to another game (blah, blah, blah), but the owners know it simply isn't true. Besides I don't think the players have the resolve to sit out two years. Not even close.

I'm on board with your Dad and MLB. I think most of that comes from the player strike that occurred so late in the season. Fans don't mind as much if they know the owners AND players are suffering. In that case the players received most of their money and then went on strike. Fehr thought he had all kinds of leverage and believed that the owners would never cancel the playoffs and World Series. He was wrong. We can all thank Fehr for lockouts.

 

[KINGS17]

Man I'm definitely with you. I know its a little off topic but there's lots of other interesting hockey to watch and other things to do if the NHL and NHLPA went crazy next time.

Maybe in Canada. People in the U.S. don't follow the junior leagues in Canada much.

 

[Reclamation Project]

Kings fans posting on the main board...

 

[kingsfan]

Maybe in Canada. People in the U.S. don't follow the junior leagues in Canada much.

It's still interesting hockey.

 

[KINGS17]

It's still interesting hockey.

It won't be watched by Americans. It's not a substitute for NHL hockey in the minds of Americans. When NHL hockey returns after a lockout, Americans and Canadians return to NHL stadiums.

 

[kingsholygrail]

Would the PA hang a lockout on a contract like Richards which is a fossil of the previous CBA though?

I'd think they'd make a bigger stink if this was a recent contract.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Would the PA hang a lockout on a contract like Richards which is a fossil of the previous CBA though?

I'd think they'd make a bigger stink if this was a recent contract.

That's certainly a consideration, but I'm inclined to believe the PA is interested in all players getting what they're owed no matter the circumstance. They're a union after all.

 

[kingsfan]

It won't be watched by Americans. It's not a substitute for NHL hockey in the minds of Americans. When NHL hockey returns after a lockout, Americans and Canadians return to NHL stadiums.

I believe the implication was DURING a lockout, not after.

 

[KINGS17]

I believe the implication was DURING a lockout, not after.

I interpreted his implication as being people would find a substitute during the lockout that they would stick with after the NHL came back.

Why would the NHL owners care if people found something else to entertain themselves during the lockout, as long as they come back when the lockout is over?

 

[Ron*]

Maybe in Canada. People in the U.S. don't follow the junior leagues in Canada much.

I don't follow them at all. Much the same way I didn't follow minor league baseball when I followed the major leagues.

 

[Kingsfan1]

Has the PA even stated that they would be appealing ?

 

[tsanuri]

Has the PA even stated that they would be appealing ?

They still have time.

 

[Kingsfan1]

They still have time.

Thanks, not sure if no response after 1 week is a good thing or a bad thing at this point. Im hoping that since the PA didnt challenge right away means they are heavily investigating everything and seeing if they have a case. Lets do this Deano !


Replace Martinez with Forbort keep Voynov , get Kopi and Lucic on reasonable contracts. Shouldnt be to hard lol.

 

[Ron*]

Thanks, not sure if no response after 1 week is a good thing or a bad thing at this point. Im hoping that since the PA didnt challenge right away means they are heavily investigating everything and seeing if they have a case. Lets do this Deano !


Replace Martinez with Forbort keep Voynov , get Kopi and Lucic on reasonable contracts. Shouldnt be to hard lol.

Can we have a separate Martinez-bashing thread?

Because I'm tired of all the "trade Martinez" talk. If y'all can meet in one place and stop littering the Kings board with this nonsense that would be great. Because then I wouldn't have to see it and I wouldn't be bothering y'all as well.

A match made in heaven.