What exactly does " MJL is keeping friends! " have to do with the team?
- MJL

Nothing at all...Unless I was referring to us as being a joint venture between HB and the Flyers..

that or I have been up for what feels like 3 days straight building phones at work and my brain is shot.

If that's all it is?

If you are found in possession of a Schedule 1 or Schedule 2 drug, such as OxyContin or Dilaudid, you could be faced with the following penalties:

Possession of 1,000 grams or more is a felony and can result in a life sentence.
Possession between 450 – 1000 grams is a 30-year felony.
Possession between 50 – 450 grams is a 20-year felony.
Possession of less than 50 grams is a 4-year felony.
- Giroux_Is_God

Whatever, doc. My point is they've got equally "bad" players on the team who they didn't terminate.

If Vincent Lecavalier got busted tomorrow with a load of Oxy, would you be upset if the Flyers terminated his contract?

It's obviously a deliberate move, an certainly ruthless. But teams make ruthless moves all the time
- Jsaquella

Agree with all of this.

However....

1.) We all knew this was a drug thing. Let's see what Richards gets charged with. If he's hauling this stuff in by the crateful, he's (frank)ed, NHL be damned. I can't help but figure Richards' silence right now is due to an ongoing investigation, whereby, if he opens his mouth, he exposes himself (or someone else) to something bad.

2.) Even if this is a case of sneaking a few pills across that he's not supposed to have and he gets caught, it's still probably gonna fall under the material breach language of his contract. Just because it wasn't a "street drug" doesn't mean it's not serious.

3.) I don't think the Kings give a poop about how this looks versus how it looks with Stoll and Voynov. There has been a ton of quotes lately, with Lombardi saying things like (and I'm paraphrasing), "I did all I could for the kid" or words to that extent. I'm guessing the Kings have some in house stuff documented that's not out in the public domain on Richards.

My problem is the Kings are allowed to spend the cap space when he hasn't even been formally charged

You want to terminate? Fine. But that should come after a period of time that includes the ability to file the grievance

This is absolute bullpoop because they were up against the cap, totally screwed, and now they get to spend money even though a grievance could still be filed -- and he could win
- AllInForFlyers

If the NHLPA and Richards win the grievance, then what? Does the cap hit for Richards get reinstated and then they have to make a decision? What about any moves they made in the mean time, using the cap space gained? This could be a real can of worms, and like you said, there should be more of a due process here. I think the League has put themselves in a potentially bad spot.

Whatever, doc. My point is they've got equally "bad" players on the team who they didn't terminate.
- Scoob

I don't think they care.

I wonder how much they've documented on Richards that we don't know about.

Nothing at all...Unless I was referring to us as being a joint venture between HB and the Flyers..

that or I have been up for what feels like 3 days straight building phones at work and my brain is shot.
- opeth_pa

Then you agree the comment was unnecessary?

Then you agree the comment was unnecessary?
- MJL

I agree the comment was a tired attempt at humor which i guess makes it unnecessary.

If the NHLPA and Richards win the grievance, then what? Does the cap hit for Richards get reinstated and then they have to make a decision? What about any moves they made in the mean time, using the cap space gained? This could be a real can of worms, and like you said, there should be more of a due process here. I think the League has put themselves in a potentially bad spot.
- MJL

There would likely be some compromise, I guess, and maybe penalize a draft pick?

I gotta think that's the worst case scenario, given what we know.

If Richards is completely exonerated, then, I think the Kings are in trouble.

If the NHLPA and Richards win the grievance, then what? Does the cap hit for Richards get reinstated and then they have to make a decision? What about any moves they made in the mean time, using the cap space gained? This could be a real can of worms, and like you said, there should be more of a due process here. I think the League has put themselves in a potentially bad spot.
- MJL

kings get caught cheating and they forfeit games pretty simple

Whatever, doc. My point is they've got equally "bad" players on the team who they didn't terminate.
- Scoob

Oh, ok then. I see your point though, for sure. Everyone's been saying "look at Voynov"

It's all really just a (frank)ed up situation, really

My problem is the Kings are allowed to spend the cap space when he hasn't even been formally charged

You want to terminate? Fine. But that should come after a period of time that includes the ability to file the grievance

This is absolute bullpoop because they were up against the cap, totally screwed, and now they get to spend money even though a grievance could still be filed -- and he could win
- AllInForFlyers

I have an issue with that as well. I'm not saying I agree with the Kings. I'm simply pointing out that the differences in Voynov's and Richards' cases basically boil down to one guy still being regarded as an above average to very good NHLer worth his contract and the other being a run down guy who isn't worth the cap hit.

It's ruthless and may well end up being disallowed by an arbitrator, at which point the Kings will obviously face penalties. Of course, the arbitrator could agree with the Kings contention that Richards violated the morals clause of his contract.

Basically, the path the Kings have chosen is to present a fait accompli to the NHL, NHLPA and Richards and dare them to make a ruling. If the termination stands they face a minimal cap penalty. If it fails...well, who knows?

Then you agree the comment was unnecessary?
- MJL

dude you need to lighten up, we're all friends here....all Flyer fans.

"could face"

If that's all it is (possession w/o prescription) I find it hard to believe the LA Kings don't have the resources to get him back and deal with it as they've dealt with the wife beater and the cokehead.

This stinks of desperation cap relief.
- Scoob

Can't help someone who doesnt want help. Who knows how long or what the kings have done to help Richards with his addiction? Maybe his decline in playing ability is due to his addiction?

3.) I don't think the Kings give a poop about how this looks versus how it looks with Stoll and Voynov. There has been a ton of quotes lately, with Lombardi saying things like (and I'm paraphrasing), "I did all I could for the kid" or words to that extent. I'm guessing the Kings have some in house stuff documented that's not out in the public domain on Richards.
- johndewar

First of all, I didn't know it was a drug thing all along, I thought initially it was a different kind of issue such as not being willing to follow a conditioning program.

Secondly, if it is true that this is a drug issue, and the Kings have known about it for a significant amount of time, they had a responsibility to address this much sooner. He should have been placed in a rehab program, and if he wasn't willing, then I'm sure the Kings had some recourse to follow such as a suspension. There are league programs for this kind of issue. If that is the case, then the Kings share some culpability here, and should be punished for it.

i hope richards wins and the kings forfeit 1st round picks
- 2Real

I'm more concerned with the NHL and NHLPA fixing the situation to avoid such moves in the future. Either specifically and uniformly spell out the terms of the "morals clause" or scrap it altogether to avoid unbalanced justice where a guy can get away with a far more heinous crime because he's a better player.

dude you need to lighten up, we're all friends here....all Flyer fans.
- flyerfan28

I agree the comment was a tired attempt at humor which i guess makes it unnecessary.
- opeth_pa

It's been a frequent occurrence from you in the last month or so. I don't recall making any posts of that nature using your screen name.

There would likely be some compromise, I guess, and maybe penalize a draft pick?

I gotta think that's the worst case scenario, given what we know.

If Richards is completely exonerated, then, I think the Kings are in trouble.
- johndewar

The Kings and the league. Look I'm not a lawyer, but I just can't believe the league allowed the Kings to proceed in this manner. They say they're on solid ground, we'll see.

Secondly, if it is true that this is a drug issue, and the Kings have known about it for a significant amount of time, they had a responsibility to address this much sooner. He should have been placed in a rehab program, and if he wasn't willing, then I'm sure the Kings had some recourse to follow such as a suspension. There are league programs for this kind of issue. If that is the case, then the Kings share some culpability here, and should be punished for it.
- MJL

I don't disagree.

And everyone is reporting it's a drug issue at this point: http://sports.yahoo.com/b...odone--tmz-232509765.html

The Kings and the league. Look I'm not a lawyer, but I just can't believe the league allowed the Kings to proceed in this manner. They say they're on solid ground, we'll see.
- MJL

I think if the NHLPA grieves this (and I imagine they would) any hearing would almost have to be expedited, unless what comes out about Richards is so bad (i.e.--it rises to the level of trafficking), that even Don Fehr (Labor's own Darth Vader) walks away.

It's been a frequent occurrence from you in the last month or so. I don't recall making any posts of that nature using your screen name.
- MJL

I have only posted a few times in the last month or so..

Once yesterday about Rinaldo and how it's a good move.
During the Provorov draft
During game 7

In those posts I havent mentioned you that i recall. Hell in those posts I dont even think I questioned Couturier.

if you feel like I have, sorry , I know perception is reality but im too busy worshiping at the altar of Hexy right now ..

I think if the NHLPA grieves this (and I imagine they would) any hearing would almost have to be expedited, unless what comes out about Richards is so bad (i.e.--it rises to the level of trafficking), that even Don Fehr (Labor's own Darth Vader) walks away.
- johndewar

There's no way the NHLPA walks away. There is too much precedence at stake.

Agree with all of this.

However....

1.) We all knew this was a drug thing. Let's see what Richards gets charged with. If he's hauling this stuff in by the crateful, he's (frank)ed, NHL be damned. I can't help but figure Richards' silence right now is due to an ongoing investigation, whereby, if he opens his mouth, he exposes himself (or someone else) to something bad.

2.) Even if this is a case of sneaking a few pills across that he's not supposed to have and he gets caught, it's still probably gonna fall under the material breach language of his contract. Just because it wasn't a "street drug" doesn't mean it's not serious.

3.) I don't think the Kings give a poop about how this looks versus how it looks with Stoll and Voynov. There has been a ton of quotes lately, with Lombardi saying things like (and I'm paraphrasing), "I did all I could for the kid" or words to that extent. I'm guessing the Kings have some in house stuff documented that's not out in the public domain on Richards.
- johndewar

It's been strongly hinted at in a few of the reports that he had a bottle of Oxy that was intended for his use, but prescribed to another person. I get the different ramifications and the process of the law in the case. Where it impacts the NHL and fans is, can teams randomly invoke the "morals clause" to avoid cap penalties for getting rid of players who no longer perform to their contracts.

I'm sure the Kings care far less about the PR aspect, especially in relation to Stoll(who is a pending UFA and was unlikely to return to the team after being caught with drugs and charged) and Voynov, whose crime is far more despicable than Richards, because there's no looming financial penalty to the team or it's cap situation for either of those players.

If Voynov is allowed to return, he will return as an exceptional young defenseman playing at a level worthy of his salary. If Richards didn't get terminated, it's likely he would have been traded, with LA having to carry part of his salary on their cap, or worse, have been bought out with long term cap ramifications for the Kings.

The Kings saw an opportunity-whether right, wrong, underhanded or despicable-and took it. The legality of it will be determined by an arbitrator or judge, in all likelihood and any punishment to the Kings will be retroactively applied.

There's no way the NHLPA walks away. There is too much precedence at stake.
- MJL

With what we "know" right now, I agree.

And by "know", I mean "what TMZ and others are reporting".

It's been strongly hinted at in a few of the reports that he had a bottle of Oxy that was intended for his use, but prescribed to another person. I get the different ramifications and the process of the law in the case. Where it impacts the NHL and fans is, can teams randomly invoke the "morals clause" to avoid cap penalties for getting rid of players who no longer perform to their contracts.

I'm sure the Kings care far less about the PR aspect, especially in relation to Stoll(who is a pending UFA and was unlikely to return to the team after being caught with drugs and charged) and Voynov, whose crime is far more despicable than Richards, because there's no looming financial penalty to the team or it's cap situation for either of those players.

If Voynov is allowed to return, he will return as an exceptional young defenseman playing at a level worthy of his salary. If Richards didn't get terminated, it's likely he would have been traded, with LA having to carry part of his salary on their cap, or worse, have been bought out with long term cap ramifications for the Kings.

The Kings saw an opportunity-whether right, wrong, underhanded or despicable-and took it. The legality of it will be determined by an arbitrator or judge, in all likelihood and any punishment to the Kings will be retroactively applied.
- Jsaquella

The optics for the Kings suck, no two ways about it.