News Article: Kings sign 5 RFA's

[KingCanadain1976]

Actually he didn't. Reread it. He said we could be on the hook for the whole thing this year if the arbitrator ruled against the Kings. Which would be the worst case. They rule against us and decide that since the buy out window has passed we can't buy him out until next year. Meaning we need to come up with another 4.43M in space this year.

I may have misread sorry I just don't see us with his salary reinstated there is going to be only two option imo either the 1.32 recapture or the 10 year buyout I don't see dean risking this season with any shot his whole salary comes back That would pretty much kill us this season in a cup window.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

That's what it will be if LA's contract termination holds up (assuming the NHLPA grieve it). If it doesn't, LA would be on the hook for the buy out amount (assuming they buy him out which I assume they would).

yup thats exactly what im thinking I don't see anyway were stuck with his 5.75 cap for this year

 

[Ron*]

yup thats exactly what im thinking I don't see anyway were stuck with his 5.75 cap for this year

We aren't. That's just the uninformed here who are thinking in the most negative way possible for the team. It is obviously logical that should we lose at arbitration that the buyout numbers would apply in regard to the CAP.

 

[KingCanadain1976]

We aren't. That's just the uninformed here who are thinking in the most negative way possible for the team. It is obviously logical that should we lose at arbitration that the buyout numbers would apply in regard to the CAP.

We are in agreement I also am agreeing that its the chicken little segment thinking as i call them thinking that . There is always going to be a segment of king fans thinking the worse. Nice to be on the same side of something for a change

 

[Captain Mittens*]

It is obviously logical

You should trademark this phrase.

 

[kingsfan]

We aren't. That's just the uninformed here who are thinking in the most negative way possible for the team. It is obviously logical that should we lose at arbitration that the buyout numbers would apply in regard to the CAP.

The only way I can see us stuck with that $5.75 million cap hit is if the NHLPA files a grievance of the termination, they win said grievance, and then the NHL refuses to allow LA to buy out Richards because the buy out window is now over.

 

[Ron*]

You should trademark this phrase.

It is obviously logical.â„¢

Done.

 

[Ron*]

The only way I can see us stuck with that $5.75 million cap hit is if the NHLPA files a grievance of the termination, they win said grievance, and then the NHL refuses to allow LA to buy out Richards because the buy out window is now over.

Yeah, I don't see that happening because the NHL approved the termination in the first place. Both Bettman and Daly are reasonable, logical thinking men who I can't argue with their decisions to date. It just makes sense and is obviously logicalâ„¢ that the worst we could suffer would be the buyout amounts for the CAP.

 

[Fishhead]

The only way I can see us stuck with that $5.75 million cap hit is if the NHLPA files a grievance of the termination, they win said grievance, and then the NHL refuses to allow LA to buy out Richards because the buy out window is now over.

I think if that happened, the Kings would suspend Richards without pay for an off-ice incident. Those don't count against the upper limit.

They should be able to buy lots of time either way, with as slow as the pace is going to go with this thing.

 

[tsanuri]

For all those questioning what can and can't be done. Here is exactly what the arbitrator is allowed to do.
Pg 114 of the CBA

17.13 Arbitrator's Decision and Award.
The Impartial Arbitrator will issue a written decision
within thirty (30) days of the close of the record and receipt of the hearing transcript. The
decision of the Impartial Arbitrator will constitute
full, final and complete disposition of the
Grievance, as the case may be, and will be binding upon the Player(s) and Club(s) involved and
the parties to this Agreement; provided, however, that
the Impartial Arbitrator will not have the
jurisdiction or authority to add to, subtract from, or alter in any way the provisions of this
Agreement, including any SPC. In resolving Grievances, the Impartial Arbitrator has the
authority to interpret, apply and determine compliance with any provision of this Agreement,
including any SPC. Otherwise, the Impartial Arbitrator shall have no authority to alter or modify
the contractual relationship or status between a Player and a Club, other than where such remedy
is expressly provided for in this Agreement.

He can't change the CBA. And the CBA has a buyout window. I would hope we could just buy him out. And by the time the ruling comes down the window would be closed. Like I have said that is a worst case scenario. But it could happen that the team must take back his cap hit for the year/ Which stands at 5.75M.
But even if the team does have an agreement with the league that doesn't mean the the NHLPA won't fight it. And it once again would be a case it's in their best interest to do so for their player. He stands to be paid 6M this year. So in the buyout he would get just under 1.5M vs the 6M in actual salary.
And since that would once again go back to the arbitrator unless there is some provision I haven't come across they would have to rule in his favor if they filed a second grievance after winning the first one.

 

[kingsfan]

Yeah, I don't see that happening because the NHL approved the termination in the first place. Both Bettman and Daly are reasonable, logical thinking men who I can't argue with their decisions to date. It just makes sense and is obviously logicalâ„¢ that the worst we could suffer would be the buyout amounts for the CAP.

There is a buyout window specified in the CBA. To do a buyout outside that window would mean modifying the CBA, and that can't be done without the NHLPA signing off on it. To which, I doubt they'd easily allow the NHL to change the CBA specifically to allow a team to buy out a player since a buy out desn't give a player a his full salary. Two-thirds is what Richards would get I believe. As such, a buy out would cost Richards millions still, so expect a NHLPA fight.

I think if that happened, the Kings would suspend Richards without pay for an off-ice incident. Those don't count against the upper limit.

They should be able to buy lots of time either way, with as slow as the pace is going to go with this thing.

If said off ice incident is finalized (IR over/done/completed) there is limits on how long and what for the Kings can suspend him. Since this is the off-season and thus far no charges have been levied against Richards that we are aware of, and Richards -again, as far as we're aware of- doesn't have any reason he can't fulfill his NHL contract, I'm not sure there is much grounds to suspend him right now.

 

[Fishhead]

If said off ice incident is finalized (IR over/done/completed) there is limits on how long and what for the Kings can suspend him. Since this is the off-season and thus far no charges have been levied against Richards that we are aware of, and Richards -again, as far as we're aware of- doesn't have any reason he can't fulfill his NHL contract, I'm not sure there is much grounds to suspend him right now.

Right now, yea, they don't have much to suspend him on. It's obvious that something happened, and since the Kings terminated it's going to at least be suspension worthy.

It's not a long term solution, but these things drag out. I would be surprised if anything substantial comes of it before camp. Any investigation by the league or the Kings would take a while, not to mention the hearing. The Kings can then suspend to milk a little more of the contract away. I doubt they can wipe the whole cap hit, but they can surely get a big chunk of it off.

I looked for suspension limits in the CBA, I couldn't find anything. I think it's at the discretion of the league?