[REPORT] NHLPA files grievance on behalf of Richards for contract termination

[elvis15]

No grievance. Meant to be somewhat of joke, obviously in bad taste. Meant no offense. Apologies.

I can accept that. Make a joke all you like, but be on topic as well or don't bother. I'm much more ok with me posting a link to a related thread than I am about someone posting 'IBTL' or other useless posts. People say they don't like me, but then they're happy with (and join in on) the spam that gets thrown around. I don't understand that.

I still don't know what you think of the topic though (perhaps you replied a month ago in the other thread).

[BeefcakeBo]

FTFY. But you knew that already and you understand how this is new information related to but not the same as his termination.

If it was an active discussion I'd understand, and I did check to be sure before posting but since it hadn't been posted in for over a month I created a new thread.

Actually it is part of the same topic where this information would have been relevant to post. Just because someone doesn't post in a prospects thread for a couple weeks doesn't mean you should make a new thread for them every time something new comes up either. As I'm sure you can see people are still discussing it there now. It seems you know that but it also seems like you can't handle having people mini mod your mistakes, even though you do the same thing all the time.

[elvis15]

Clearly different situations between a prospect thread (which is in a sub-forum that traditionally is limited for new threads) and a new development in a terminated contract. And clearly you've seen multiple instances in the past where related yet different news is posted in separate threads all the time. And finally, no, people aren't still discussing it there now, the last post is still July 6, as it was before I started this thread.

If you want to call me out, fine, but at least get your facts straight.

As I've said to others, do you have anything you'd like to discuss about the fact the NHLPA is grieving the termination?

[cdubuya]

Man, i hate unions for the most part, but I've been waiting way too effing long for this to happen.

Voynov doesnt get contract terminated for beating the living hell out of gf, and Richards does for what Im guessing was for possessing a personal amount of addictive prescription meds? Since when did the NHL turn their backs on substance abusers?

This is cap circumvention, pure and simple. And with everything going on in todays world regarding domestic abusers being let off the hook, the NHL looks really stupid by allowing this farce to continue.

[canuktravella]

as far as i see it kings will lose richards case and be on hook for voynov even if he gets deported after his jail time served which is great for our chances to sign lucic because kings need to lock up kopitar for long term and he will get 8.5 mill per while kings will be in cap hell next five yrs

[tas]

i'm sick of people saying "oh if richards contract was terminated, voynov's and kane's have to be as well or else it's a conspiracy."

the cba doesn't say that a player's contract HAS to be terminated for a material breach, it says it MAY be terminated. it's an option. it allows the team's and the league to use their discretion.

get over it.

even of you say it's just the kings circumventing the cap, it's irrelevant. if richards was in breach of his contract, the cba clearly allows it to be terminated. sure, you might think it's dirty pool, but it would be absolutely stupid for the kings to not exercise the option in this case given the opportunity to do so.

[Maniwaki Canuck]

Inevitable that the NHLPA was going to file a grievance on behalf of one of its members. What a big surprise.

From a purely selfish perspective, I hope the Kings have to eat the Richards cap hit...put the Kings into cap purgatory for awhile. NHL has always been full of sketchy characters -- from players to owners to agents (Alan Eagleson, anyone?). Can't wait to see how this plays out in the NHL kangaroo courts.

As opposed to many, I expect the Kings to win this grievance.

The NHL has been seeking ways to terminate players contracts (non-guaranteed) for years.

This will be a foundation stone ruling for which we will see many more in the coming years. Players be warned.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but normally grievances go to an independent 3rd party arbitrator. No doubt the NHL has all the questionable motives you mention, but hopefully it's not their call.

[Maniwaki Canuck]

I am hoping that this happens with Voynov. If you can't cross the border you can't play. But I am still sure that the way LA handled it would be jumping the gun, if they are just presuming he'll face this restriction.

Either they have something good, which is likely enough I guess, or they'll get smashed. It will be interesting to see, but my money is on a backroom settlement where we never learn the details or payout.

It's not just a matter between the Kings and Richardson: the NHL is involved too since this bears on the salary cap and buyout provisions in the collective agreement. Whatever happens theoretically has to conform to the collective agreement, so it can't be an entirely private resolution, especially if it goes to an arbitrator. While I'd never rule out the NHL's ability to get creative with its rules, hopefully it's in somebody else's hands to make the decision.

[elvis15]

Man, i hate unions for the most part, but I've been waiting way too effing long for this to happen.

Voynov doesnt get contract terminated for beating the living hell out of gf, and Richards does for what Im guessing was for possessing a personal amount of addictive prescription meds? Since when did the NHL turn their backs on substance abusers?

This is cap circumvention, pure and simple. And with everything going on in todays world regarding domestic abusers being let off the hook, the NHL looks really stupid by allowing this farce to continue.

That's a pretty simplistic and slanted description of the two. Sure, Voyanov beat up his girlfriend (I'll leave the "living hell" description to the experts) but who says it was a personal amount for Richards? And who says he had a prescription? They didn't stop him and arrest him at the border because he had a legal prescription of a personal-sized amount of oxy, since surely people cross the border all the time with that.

Also, there is the point that has been made that there is more set up for dealing with drug related instances then there is for physical violence within the NHL. Or, if it was more related to not having told the Kings about the arrest causing a deal to fall through - especially if Richards had anything he agreed to with the Kings (or maybe even the Flyers) around getting caught with drugs considering his party history.

While I don't disagree that we've seen a number of moves recently that amount to teams using loopholes to get out from under the cap, we don't know the full details here so while suspect we can't 100% say it was circumvention, especially when they had a get out of cap jail free card after the lockout.

[combover]

most organization would take the" we will stand behind our troubled player and see to it that he gets the help he need "

LA was done with richards its a pretty message clear to any and all the players in there system when your usefulness has run out or someone better comes along we will find any and all reasons to get rid of you by any means possible and we won't stand behind you or support you in your time of need.

i hope Richards wins and the kings as they should be stuck with his contract , cap hit and the black eye on the franchise for essentially being scum-bags.

as for the voynov mess i agree that this is more of a "conduct unbecoming" especially since he's been convicted but there's a chance he can still be a good player for them so they'll back him.

women's rights groups should be all over this because again the message LA is sending is clear - wife beater ok, addiction problem good riddance.

[cdubuya]

That's a pretty simplistic and slanted description of the two. Sure, Voyanov beat up his girlfriend (I'll leave the "living hell" description to the experts) but who says it was a personal amount for Richards? And who says he had a prescription? They didn't stop him and arrest him at the border because he had a legal prescription of a personal-sized amount of oxy, since surely people cross the border all the time with that.

Also, there is the point that has been made that there is more set up for dealing with drug related instances then there is for physical violence within the NHL. Or, if it was more related to not having told the Kings about the arrest causing a deal to fall through - especially if Richards had anything he agreed to with the Kings (or maybe even the Flyers) around getting caught with drugs considering his party history.

While I don't disagree that we've seen a number of moves recently that amount to teams using loopholes to get out from under the cap, we don't know the full details here so while suspect we can't 100% say it was circumvention, especially when they had a get out of cap jail free card after the lockout.

http://deadspin.com/slava-voynovs-domestic-violence-arrest-was-a-bloody-sce-1671317956

No one said it was a personal amount. I made the assumption Richards isnt involved in a drug smuggling ring. I could be wrong. Seeing as the RCMP wont release any information about what happened, no one in the public can know for sure. Thats why I qualified it with "Im guessing". Obviously if it turns out Richards had copious amounts for the purpose of dealing, that will change things. My guess it was a larger personal amount. And I didnt say he had a prescription for it, he obviously didnt. That doesnt mean its not prescription medication. And even in the past, the NHL doesnt usually shun drug abusers. They have a substance abuse program to help them get the help they need.

After the uproar caused by Goodell botchimg the Ray Rice suspension, you'd think the NHL would be treading a little more carefully with this issue.

To me, its pretty obvious this was LAs free ticket out of a terrible contract. NHL should be discouraging this behavior, and NHLPA should seem a little more outraged than they appear to be.

[elvis15]

http://deadspin.com/slava-voynovs-domestic-violence-arrest-was-a-bloody-sce-1671317956

No one said it was a personal amount. I made the assumption Richards isnt involved in a drug smuggling ring. I could be wrong. Seeing as the RCMP wont release any information about what happened, no one in the public can know for sure. Thats why I qualified it with "Im guessing". Obviously if it turns out Richards had copious amounts for the purpose of dealing, that will change things. My guess it was a larger personal amount. And I didnt say he had a prescription for it, he obviously didnt. That doesnt mean its not prescription medication. And even in the past, the NHL doesnt usually shun drug abusers. They have a substance abuse program to help them get the help they need.

After the uproar caused by Goodell botchimg the Ray Rice suspension, you'd think the NHL would be treading a little more carefully with this issue.

To me, its pretty obvious this was LAs free ticket out of a terrible contract. NHL should be discouraging this behavior, and NHLPA should seem a little more outraged than they appear to be.

Uh, did you read the post I quoted and was specifically replying to? Like when you wrote it? Because you said that.

"I'm guessing" doesn't remove the subjective take on comparing someone "beating the living hell" out of another, and "possessing a personal amount" of oxy. Clearly they stopped and arrested him for more than just having a valid prescription and/or his own personally allowed amount while crossing the border.

Saying he obviously didn't have a prescription is also speculative based on the information we have, even if it's likely.

[Ghostsof1915]

I think the problem here is like all decisions from NHL head office. They lack consistency. NJ does cap circumvention, then the NHL drops the punishment. Voynov is ruled effecting the King's cap, then the NHL exempts it for the rest of the season.

Gillis tries an end run with Luongo's contract, yet we're stuck with the cap hit still?

You can't run a league were you selectively decide who get punished and how. It's just like player suspensions. One minute it's a slap on the wrist. Then the next player its 6 games for the same thing?

[cdubuya]

Uh, did you read the post I quoted and was specifically replying to? Like when you wrote it? Because you said that.

"I'm guessing" doesn't remove the subjective take on comparing someone "beating the living hell" out of another, and "possessing a personal amount" of oxy. Clearly they stopped and arrested him for more than just having a valid prescription and/or his own personally allowed amount while crossing the border.

Saying he obviously didn't have a prescription is also speculative based on the information we have, even if it's likely.

Well it seems to me like in your opinion, no one should be allowed to debate this issue, because the facts havent been made public. I think its pretty safe to say Voynov "beat the living hell out of his gf". That deadspin article tells you all you need to know about the extent of her injuries. As for my guesses, I think they were fair. If he had been busted with a shipment of narcotics, he would have been arrested and charged. If he had a small amount of pain meds with a prescription, this probably wouldnt be an issue. I think its fair to say the case lies somewhere in the middle. My guess is fairly large personal amount with no prescription. If this is the case, I dont think this should qualify as a material breach of contract. It seems more like someone who has an addiction to pain meds and needs help. What message is the union and league sending to its players by allowing a team to terminate his contract because of this fact?

I cant say i completely blame Lombardi for attempting this approach to get Richards off the books, but I was surprised it took the union so long to file a grievance. It could be they were trying to wait out the RCMP for more info. I dont know all the facts, and Im not going to read into it too much, and analyze the hell out of it like some posters do with other issues.

I hope the kings get stuck with his contract, and Richards gets the help he needs.

[Bissurnette]

This is a ridiculous double standard for the Kings organization which is certainly a point of contention for pretty much all other teams in the NHL. You can't just terminate a player's contract, namely one that you have been trying to get rid of for some time, based on drug (painkiller) charges. To me this is clearly a case of the NHL trying to cradle a sweetheart organization that has the potential to grow the market, which ethically speaking is very problematic. If you want to terminate a contract based on those charges, then you certainly have to terminate a contract based on domestic abuse charges. Ironically, both players play for the same organization yet the more promising one gets to keep his contract while the other one gets the boot.

This raises another issue that many have brought up already, if Kane is found guilty of those rape charges, does that mean the NHL will terminate his contract?

[elvis15]

Well it seems to me like in your opinion, no one should be allowed to debate this issue, because the facts havent been made public. I think its pretty safe to say Voynov "beat the living hell out of his gf". That deadspin article tells you all you need to know about the extent of her injuries. As for my guesses, I think they were fair. If he had been busted with a shipment of narcotics, he would have been arrested and charged. If he had a small amount of pain meds with a prescription, this probably wouldnt be an issue. I think its fair to say the case lies somewhere in the middle. My guess is fairly large personal amount with no prescription. If this is the case, I dont think this should qualify as a material breach of contract. It seems more like someone who has an addiction to pain meds and needs help. What message is the union and league sending to its players by allowing a team to terminate his contract because of this fact?

I cant say i completely blame Lombardi for attempting this approach to get Richards off the books, but I was surprised it took the union so long to file a grievance. It could be they were trying to wait out the RCMP for more info. I dont know all the facts, and Im not going to read into it too much, and analyze the hell out of it like some posters do with other issues.

I hope the kings get stuck with his contract, and Richards gets the help he needs.

Not at all, I'm just saying let's try and not let bias creep into the debate. Presenting one as a terrible, egregious act while downplaying the other to the point that it doesn't sound illegal isn't exactly presenting a fair comparison. Try not to paint one with a villian's brush while suggesting the other was maybe just unlucky with the way you've worded it.

I do think that one is worse than the other and it's a bit of a shame that Richards was terminated but Voyonov doesn't have any implications beyond his sentence through the courts.

Having said that, it's not like Lombardi has been trying to get rid of Richards the whole time, otherwise he would have taken advantage of the buyout window. It was a mistake obviously and as has been mentioned he's likely taking advantage of the fact he wasn't informed by Richards' camp about being detained at the border to where it could impact his ability to play in the NHL and certainly that it scuttled a trade.

But again, we don't know the facts on what happened and why he was terminated as a result, or why it could be overturned or upheld.

[cripplereh]

I have to say it,when this goes to court the Kings will have to keep Richards contract unless they can prove he broke his contract and drugs or alcohol means he needs treatment so LA will have to get him some and if he doesn't go then they can terminate his contract! It's that plain and simple!

[elvis15]

Well, as we've been saying for some time, not so plain and simple depending on why they actually terminated the contract and if there were any stipulations in his contract that he violated. Clearly the Kings wouldn't do something like this without at least some kind of case.

[Provost]

As opposed to many, I expect the Kings to win this grievance.

The NHL has been seeking ways to terminate players contracts (non-guaranteed) for years.

This will be a foundation stone ruling for which we will see many more in the coming years. Players be warned.

With a pretty solid background in labour relations, I disagree.

The NHLPA will argue that the contract termination was not not for the "material breach" that the team is contending. they will argue that he was terminated due to performance reasons and that is not a permitted reason to terminate a contract.

A "material breach" has a very specific legal meaning and has to be something of a very serious nature that means there is no other recourse open except to invalidate a contract. Clauses of a contract can be violated by both sides (and regularly are) without being able to be considered a "material breach".

The fact that the same team has a player actually serving jail time right now who did not have their contract terminated is a pretty good barometer on whether the team sees off-ice behavioural issues as "material breaches of contract.

The team terminated his contract before any police investigation could be conducted. As far as we know there have been no charges laid even to this point.

The only route to victory for the team is if there is a lot of background information that we don't know about. If Richards had been enrolled in the league's substance abuse programs and had been given other "lesser" discipline previously for the same type of issues, that could be a factor. There is a set out process for the league drug program and steps to be followed. Drug addiction itself isn't grounds normally grounds for termination as it is considered an illness and not culpable behaviour. The process is treatment programs, and unless the player has refused those treatment programs it would be hard to terminate them.

It seems unlikely though as we have not heard of any suspensions for other incidents with Richards.

It is more likely a hail mary idea by the team to see if they could get away with it. The worst case is that they get stuck with the cap hit as a regular buyout which they would have almost certainly done even absent this incident.

The wildcard of course is the league head office. No on on the planet has ever been able to figure out how they will make decisions. They would have some interest in helping set precedents that allow the owners to ditch players at will. On the other hand, they may not want to wade into a dispute that will certainly become a court battle if they uphold the contract termination. It is a weak case and more likely to set a precedent against terminating contracts. The league will also consider the opinion of their "important" team owners/GMs on whether supporting the Kings' salary cap circumvention attempts will piss other folks off (pretty likely since LA has been a winner).

They will be in some cap trouble if they get both Voynov and Richards values back on the book.

[KeslerPlaysLikeACanadian]

Having said that, it's not like Lombardi has been trying to get rid of Richards the whole time, otherwise he would have taken advantage of the buyout window. It was a mistake obviously and as has been mentioned he's likely taking advantage of the fact he wasn't informed by Richards' camp about being detained at the border to where it could impact his ability to play in the NHL and certainly that it scuttled a trade.

What? Are in on trade talks? Just because they didn't buy him out, they must want him? They have said that they found out about Richards' situation during trade talks with Calgary. Based on all the rumours and reports, they have been trying to get rid of him for a long time. Sending a veteran to the AHL kinda speaks to that.