Oh, my.

That sounds like he got caught doing something.

Because everyone knows that they want cap relief, and that they've tried to trade him, and that they were buying him out.

The only way you try to terminate his deal is if he straight-up got caught doing something
- AllInForFlyers

I don't think he got caught doing something. Reading a SPC and the clauses written into each and every contract will shed some light on it.

When did I say that you did want to trade For Boychuk? It was a simple and reasonable question.
- MJL

How is it a relevant question unless I've traded for him first?

Yes, it is.
- MJL

This is going to get kind of ugly, isn't it?

Plus, i could be wrong, but legally don't they have to offer him rehabilitation before they could terminate him? Could be wrong.
- jak521

That makes sense.

So lets recap:

I disagree with you that Striet was a bad signing, something you claim as fact. And I agree with the other post that the Flyers need to get away from the "ooh shiny" mentality. You say that is somehow contradictory.
- MBFlyerfan

wouldn't you say that streit signi g was in fact an ooh shiny signing and if not? how come? i say it was because he only makes them marginally better in the short term whenthey could keep that cap space available in case a better player who can make a bigger impact, becomes available.

wow this richards talk harkens back to when the underlying reason of his departure was due to off ice issues and that was denied.

How is it a relevant question unless I've traded for him first?
- Tomahawk

The entire conversation is discussing what some wanted to have happen instead of what did happen, and offering players as an example of what could've been done. My question is relevant to that scenarioand it's a simple yes or no question. Answer or don't answer, your choice.

The entire conversation is discussing what some wanted to have happen instead of what did happen, and offering players as an example of what could've been done. My question is relevant to that scenarioand it's a simple yes or no question. Answer or don't answer, your choice.
- MJL

No.

I dig the Goth look of that chick. Although, the fact that she dresses like that leads me to believe it is another one of Holmgren's failures as a GM.
- hockeylover

C'mon. Cat Dennings is way too young for me but she's a nice looking young lady.

You bet it is.

Holy poop, I can't even imagine what the Kings are trying to do here.
- johndewar

Whatever it is. Let's try it on Vinny!

I dont know the players rights in the CBA, but lack of conditioning seems like a weak excuse to void a contract. Things like criminal violations, repetitive drug and alcohol abuse (after treatments) and stuff like that I could understand.. but I still think it should have to go through some sort of tribunal.
- jak521

I't's written into every SPC, a player is expected to keep to a certain standard of physical fitness and is required to meet standards for off season training as part of his contract obligations.

Elliotte Friedman tweeted this

http://bleacherreport.com...er-2015-nhl-draft/page/19

Flyers at #13.

Elliotte Friedman tweeted this


- Jsaquella

so dry island was not tabloid fodder after all

This is going to get kind of ugly, isn't it?
- BulliesPhan87

Potentially, yes.

Plus, i could be wrong, but legally don't they have to offer him rehabilitation before they could terminate him? Could be wrong.
- jak521

This is total speculation on my part, but it's known that Richards and Lombardi met last summer, and the result of their meeting was Lombardi not using the CBO. I wonder if rehab was part of their agreement, and Richards failed to make good on it?

Again, total speculation, and I'm not 100% convinced it's a drugs thing.

It's speculation and all that, but I can't help but think Richards has some serious off ice issues. I think this is just the final indication of it. Kings aren't going to go this route and spend his money elsewhere without a pretty slam dunk case. This guy's play just degraded way too quickly for a reasonable explanation

Elliotte Friedman tweeted this


- Jsaquella

That is going to be fascinating -- I wonder what it is they are going to say he didn't do or what standard he did not meet

Mandatory workouts? Meeting with their training staff? Failure to report for a physical?

This is going to be really interesting

There is a specific clause that says the player must follow the team's rules on conditioning and conduct or they can terminate the contract.

Last summer Lombardi told Richards to stay in LA and get into better shape for the season. He didn't which, by the letter of the law, is a valid reason to terminate the deal.

That is going to be fascinating -- I wonder what it is they are going to say he didn't do or what standard he did not meet

Mandatory workouts? Meeting with their training staff? Failure to report for a physical?

This is going to be really interesting
- AllInForFlyers

Didn't they already make a big deal about him going home when they asked him to stay in the area and train w/ the staff? Edit: Laught.

wouldn't you say that streit signi g was in fact an ooh shiny signing and if not? how come? i say it was because he only makes them marginally better in the short term whenthey could keep that cap space available in case a better player who can make a bigger impact, becomes available.
- JoeRussomanno

In a way, yes. Flyers needed help on defense, saw he was to become a UFA so they tossed an offer that would entice Streit to go to Philly over anywhere else (I don't know if there were other offers or not).

He's a good offensive defenseman and has been a good addition to the team. Should he have less of a cap hit and duration of contract? Yes. But Flyers wanted him.

There is a specific clause that says the player must follow the team's rules on conditioning and conduct or they can terminate the contract.

Last summer Lombardi told Richards to stay in LA and get into better shape for the season. He didn't which, by the letter of the law, is a valid reason to terminate the deal.
- Jsaquella

Ahhhhh...that is going to be interesting, indeed

It's speculation and all that, but I can't help but think Richards has some serious off ice issues. I think this is just the final indication of it. Kings aren't going to go this route and spend his money elsewhere without a pretty slam dunk case. This guy's play just degraded way too quickly for a reasonable explanation
- eayost

I think the Kings are trying to avoid paying Richards for the next 12 years, and getting nailed with a $4mm cap hit in 2018-19 & 2019-20

Didn't they already make a big deal about him going home when they asked him to stay in the area and train w/ the staff? Edit: Laught.
- Tomahawk

But I actually hadn't read that -- I know Lombardi went to him, but I didn't know that he had requested/told Richards to stay in LA

Fascinating

There is a specific clause that says the player must follow the team's rules on conditioning and conduct or they can terminate the contract.

Last summer Lombardi told Richards to stay in LA and get into better shape for the season. He didn't which, by the letter of the law, is a valid reason to terminate the deal.
- Jsaquella

isn't there like a statute of limitations or somethi g on that? i mean if that's the reason, shouldn't they have terminated lastyear?