Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - CarltonTheBear

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 767
1
Well, and that's the thing. What the Kings are claiming here, the right to terminate a contract simply based on an arrest, is a HUGE deal. It's not a minor thing. It's not something that wouldn't have been made a stink of in CBA negotiations. Leaving aside whether or not you believe in a million years Donald Fehr would agree to something like that, the idea that it wouldn't even be a point of contention to the point that it would, at the very least, be something we'd heard about stretches credulity beyond the breaking point.

Right. It's a slippery-slope. If the Kings get away with this will Columbus be able to terminate Clarkson's contract if he gets arrested for jaywalking?

2
Well, yeah,and that's the other thing that rings so hollow about the Kings/League's claim. In all of the other times a player has been arrested over the last few years, we've never once heard anything about how teams feel that they have the right to terminate contracts before any sort of charges are brought/convictions made. Reporters haven't brought it up as an option, league sources haven't said it's been a consideration...it seems to be something entirely invented for Richards.

When Ryan Malone was charged with a DUI and possession of cocaine the Lightning had to buy-out the final year of his contract. Why didn't they just terminate it? Jarret Stoll was charged with possession too this Spring, but his contract was expiring anyway. It's probably important to note though that both players signed with a new team and neither were disciplined by the league in any way (either with a fine or suspension).

Everyone and their mother knows the real reason why Richards' contract was terminated.

3
The league doesn't seem to be in any hurry to reinstate him. There's an issue with his immigration status - which is where the deportation rumours are coming from - and the league is basically waiting until after that's settled to really dive into things from their end, so he could end up missing a long time.

Well they're not in a hurry sure but that's only because he's still in jail and because his immigration issues haven't been sorted out. I read a little about his potential deportation, it doesn't sound like that generally happens in domestic dispute cases.

It wouldn't surprise me if the league looked at this as an opportunity to send a strong message and set the precedent for the future.

I think that the NHL is terrified right now about setting a precedent considering what's going on with Patrick Kane right now.

4
I'm not sure about the deportation thing - I think that's mostly internet chatter/rumour - but the league is apparently still conducting their own investigation (whatever that means), and are considering all possible options, including terminating his contract. Nevertheless, he's still suspended indefinitely, and there's a very real chance he'll never dress in the NHL again. The Kings have really just deferred to the league on this one.

Obviously we're just in wait and see mode on this one, but I'd be pretty shocked to see him miss this entire season. I don't even think that the NHL will add much, if anything to his suspension. He's already technically been suspended for 76 games, that's like time-served. Not saying it's right or anything like that though. Even if his contract gets terminated for some reason, he's still a very good defenceman. Some team will pick him up.

5
Former Leafs: Ex-Files / Re: Cody Franson
« on: August 27, 2015, 06:37:16 PM »

Really, really, really must not want to play in Buffalo. I mean, who else would be offering him a multi-year deal at this point in the offseason?

6
I don't think that's even an option. Either Richards' contract is terminated, or it's in force. If it's determined to be in force, he'd count at the full cap value - though, the league may allow some leeway for the Kings in regard to a buy-out. Anything would be considered to be renegotiating the contract.

Well, it really depends on how much power an independent arbitrator will have. That one Forbes article I posted brought up a couple of similar instances with the MLB about 10 years ago. In both cases a contract was terminated, the PA grieved, and the two sides settled with a sizeable payout of the players contract. I don't know how that ended up working cap-wise though.

7
You shouldn't be. There's no downside for them here and they can take a one in a million shot at giving teams a means for terminating contracts that's entirely at their discretion.

Yeah I guess. I also think that LA's maybe banking on an arbitration settlement that has them coming out better than a contract buyout would. Maybe something that ends up paying Richard's the full value of his contract but with less cap hit. I dunno if that's even possible, but I'm sure they'd try to push for it.

8
You could also argue that, if it doesn't specifically prohibit contract termination (and, without having the Drug Policy in front of me, I can't say for sure whether or not it does), it allows for it - and that is absolutely the kind of argument the Kings' lawyers are going to make. The Drug Policy sets forth the minimum standard for dealing with this situation. It's not necessarily exhaustive or absolute.

Eric Macramalla was on TSN this afternoon and said that nowhere in the drug policy does it bring up termination. It also clearly states what has to happen when a player is arrested and what happens when a player is charged. If you're arrested for possession you're evaluated by the leagues doctors and put in a two-week treatment program. If you're convicted then you're suspended with pay and you go into a program for a year or more. These don't exactly sound like minimum requirements that allow teams to bypass them for stricter punishments. They're collectively bargained agreements that need to be adhered to. And like I said, there's a good reason for that. If Richards does indeed have a serious drug problem and is addicted to pain killers or what not, the league can't just toss him aside. They need to give him the help that he requires because there's a very strong likelihood that he got addicted to this stuff because of hockey. Honestly I'm amazed that the league's lawyers even allowed the termination in the first place.

9
I imagine having it happen at the border would add to the likelihood - it potentially gets looked at as a trafficking violation by the US, which would be a big time no-no.

Yeah I always figured that would have put him in the biggest amount of trouble, but considering the report says it was just a small amount of pills and it was considered for personal use I think he's pretty safe from any trafficking charges.

10
To be fair though, we really don't know what transpired here.  There could be other factors that haven't be revealed yet.

Well I mean we know that he was caught with a few pills in a bottle during a car search while trying to cross the border. I don't really know what other details there could be that would have an impact here.

11
This could still result in border crossing issues - and, being that he's being charged on the Canadian side, that would mean the issue would be with getting into the US. So, LA might still have a case.

Is that something that would happen in a minor drug charge like this? Genuinely don't know. I mean plenty of professional athletes have been caught with drugs before and I've never really heard about it prohibiting their travel. Does the fact that it specifically happened while crossing the border have an effect on that?

12
His cap hit and term warranted contract termination in the best interests of the team.  This event simply gave them the opportunity to do so.

Not saying I agree with it, but they saw an easy way out and took advantage of it.  Just another loop hole being exploited.

Like Nik said, this loophole doesn't actually exist though. The CBA clearly outlines what has to happen when a team is faced with a player who is abusing drugs/alcohol. And termination isn't one of the steps outlined. There is a very good reason that this area was collectively bargained for, and that's because the life of a NHL player can easily lead to substance abuse. We've obviously seen the worst-case scenarios for something like this more times than we should have (Belak, Rypien, Boogaard). The NHL and the team that a player has a contract with has an obligation to assist these players when they get caught up in this stuff, not toss them to the curb because they're an inconvenience.

13
Another new detail from TSN/Westhead:

Canadian border guards found “some pills in a single bottle” during a random search of Richards’ car and he was arrested by RCMP, a source told TSN. “It was clearly a small quantity intended for his personal use,” the source told TSN.

...

Under Canada's controlled drug and substances act, prosecutors will be able to choose whether to proceed with the case summarily, which is typically the case for first-time offenders, or through an indictment, which is used for repeat and serious offenders.

If prosecutors proceed summarily, Richards faces a maximum $1,000 fine or up to six months in prison. If prosecutors proceed by indictment, he faces up to seven years in prison.


Very small amount of pills, first-time offender, he'll likely pay a tiny fine and do some community service. Really can't see any way this warrants a contract termination.

14

Richards has now been charged with illegal possession of a controlled substance, is scheduled to appear in court on September 10th. Not good news for Richards, but as that link I posted before shows the CBA has a pretty clear-cut procedure for how to handle cases like this and termination isn't involved.

15
General NHL News & Views / Re: Official Ottawa Senators Thread
« on: August 26, 2015, 04:30:38 PM »
Man hearing a superstar hockey player talk like that would be huge news if it was from a market anybody cared about.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 767