Vanflyer Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 That doesn't mean he's worthless (although it's arguable whether he's worth $5.75M - I wouldn't want to pay that) but it does mean - like VLC in PHL - there's not an obvious role for him on the team he's signed to. The interesting thing, which I had not realized before, is that both carters and richards NTC were voided because they were moved before they were actually effective with the Flyers. There must have been some language in there in regards to that within each of their contracts. So...... IF LA could find a willing dance partner, they would not need any approval from Richards to move him. That is much more desirable than having to eat some cash via buyout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 The interesting thing, which I had not realized before, is that both carters and richards NTC were voided because they were moved before they were actually effective with the Flyers. There must have been some language in there in regards to that within each of their contracts. So...... IF LA could find a willing dance partner, they would not need any approval from Richards to move him. That is much more desirable than having to eat some cash via buyout. Yeah, the clause becomes invalid once the player is moved. I think that is "standard". Would L.A. retain some salary to deal Richards instead of buying him out? Possible... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Would L.A. retain some salary to deal Richards instead of buying him out? Possible... I think its a bit of a chess game. Stoll is a UFA after next season. IF LA can re-sign him, that makes Richards expendable and plausible for LA to take some cash on from their side. If they can not, just keep richards as it would likely be net some with whatever cash LA would "eat" (I am assuming 1M at a minimum). Stoll is making 3.25 and will certainly want a raise (guessing 4M range). So for a difference (if my assumptions are true) of 750k, I just keep status quo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 I think its a bit of a chess game. Stoll is a UFA after next season. IF LA can re-sign him, that makes Richards expendable and plausible for LA to take some cash on from their side. If they can not, just keep richards as it would likely be net some with whatever cash LA would "eat" (I am assuming 1M at a minimum). Stoll is making 3.25 and will certainly want a raise (guessing 4M range). So for a difference (if my assumptions are true) of 750k, I just keep status quo. Agreed. The only real pressing question is the compliance buyouts. If they don't go that route, I could see them eventually eating a little salary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 (edited) Agreed. The only real pressing question is the compliance buyouts. If they don't go that route, I could see them eventually eating a little salary. The other part to consider is that LA did give some assets to get Richards (B. Schenn / Simmonds and a 2nd = Grossman). It would look painfully bad to just let him walk (ie on a buyout). If he is going to go, it would make more sense for LA to eat some cash and find a suitable trading partner- even if for picks, to save face. Although two (potentially) stanley cup rings could certainly squelch the laughter from other teams / fans. Edited June 3, 2014 by Vanflyer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 The other part to consider is that LA did give some assets to get Richards (B. Schenn / Simmonds and a 2nd = Grossman). It would look painfully bad to just let him walk (ie on a buyout). If he is going to go, it would make more sense for LA to eat some cash and find a suitable trading partner- even if for picks, to save face. Although two (potentially) stanley cup rings could certainly squelch the laughter from other teams / fans. A lot would depend on what happens this Spring. Lombardi with two rings is going to be hard to argue with... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 A lot would depend on what happens this Spring. Lombardi with two rings is going to be hard to argue with... Yup, and he could easily pull a Roy-Roenick moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanaticV3.0 Posted June 3, 2014 Author Share Posted June 3, 2014 Career wise?? Are you kidding me?? Its what are you doing now? Carter is going to be runner up for the Conne Smythe if he keeps going the way he is and LA wins. Kopitar will probably get it (again if LA wins). Do you hear Richards name anywhere around that discussion? Me either. I hear crickets. So, when you talk about an ass-kicker of an argument, put that one to point. Add to that a 5.75m contract for a 41 pt two way player and my argument is very solid. What I'm doing? I have nothing to do with this. This is all about facts. Career points: Richards - 466Carter - 460 Career PO points: Richards - 85Carter - 69 Everything you're saying about Carter is about this year's PO run. Yeah, he's having a better PO, I'm not denying that. But 21 games doesn't make a career and if you actually take the time to look at their careers, Richards is easily the better all-around player. Carter doesn't even have the edge in the area he's supposedly significantly better in. Richards still beats him in that. And there's no debating who the better defensive player in. Oh and by the way, those 22 points you keep bragging about for Carter, not a single one of them is a GWG. Richards takes that category once again, haha! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanaticV3.0 Posted June 3, 2014 Author Share Posted June 3, 2014 Here's the thing. With Richards' defensive accountability, he's way better than VLC (sucks) for me. Is it worth 1.5M more? No, probably not. Assuming this is completely "what ifs?" what would you do with Couturier? Doesn't he become fairly redundant with Richards back on the team? I wouldn't bring Richards back unless he's already bought out by LA and wants to sign for $2.5M. Not happening. First, I would have to imagine there can't be a very good taste in his mouth toward Flyer management, although maybe Hextall helps that. Second, as you point out, there's really not a viable spot for him. You keep him. He isn't ready to be the team's 2nd line center, but Richards is. And since when is having two lines capable of legit two-way play a bad thing? So what if it's not traditional? Offense is overrated. The only player on both Cup teams that had 70 or more points was Kopitar. Richards scored 40 in a down year in a diminished role. Drop him in a 2nd line and the 50 or so points he gets in that role is more than enough, especially with Giroux, Voracek, and Simmonds pulling the weight offensively. Again, I already said he's making too much money and we don't need a center, but if he was bought out I'd certainly consider it. Schenn isn't a center and Couturier isn't a 2nd line one, so that's where Richards comes in if I'm in charge. Adios VLC. At that point I don't care how I get rid of him, I just know that I do it. I'll pull a Milton if I have to. Just shove him in the basement or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Everything you're saying about Carter is about this year's PO run. Yeah, he's having a better PO, I'm not denying that. But 21 games doesn't make a career and if you actually take the time to look at their careers, Richards is easily the better all-around player. Carter doesn't even have the edge in the area he's supposedly significantly better in. Richards still beats him in that. And there's no debating who the better defensive player in. Oh and by the way, those 22 points you keep bragging about for Carter, not a single one of them is a GWG. Richards takes that category once again, haha! There is no question that Richards was always the marquee player ahead of Carter (leader, two-way player, etc.). But not just this post-season, but the entire season long, Carter has been outplaying Richards. Why are you so hell bent on advocating Richards and bringing up career stuff when the whole dialogue is focused around current. I mean I can spin stats any way you want. Both are fine players, but the fact remains that this season (regular and playoffs), Carter is flat out better than Richards- in all areas. I am not thumping my chest on that, because I don't care either way. But its a literal fact. You sound like Regis slurping on Crosby's *******. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanaticV3.0 Posted June 3, 2014 Author Share Posted June 3, 2014 There is no question that Richards was always the marquee player ahead of Carter (leader, two-way player, etc.). But not just this post-season, but the entire season long, Carter has been outplaying Richards. Why are you so hell bent on advocating Richards and bringing up career stuff when the whole dialogue is focused around current. I mean I can spin stats any way you want. Both are fine players, but the fact remains that this season (regular and playoffs), Carter is flat out better than Richards- in all areas. I am not thumping my chest on that, because I don't care either way. But its a literal fact. You sound like Regis slurping on Crosby's *******. Because when judging a player - or in this case comparing two - you don't just look at one year. It's like saying John Druce is a great PO performer, but only offering that one fluke season as proof of that. It's stupid to think that's a valid argument. 0 GWGs. There's another literal fact for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanflyer Posted June 3, 2014 Share Posted June 3, 2014 Because when judging a player - or in this case comparing two - you don't just look at one year. It's like saying John Druce is a great PO performer, but only offering that one fluke season as proof of that. It's stupid to think that's a valid argument. 0 GWGs. There's another literal fact for you. If you look at the thread topic, its about Richards out of LA. Which means, does he fit there? Is he worth the money? Is he performing? All of the above imo. You want to turn this into career stats and all that. I have repeatedly stated, both players are fine players. Yet, Richards is odd man out in LA at the moment (behind Kopitar, Carter and Stoll). Stop bringing up career stuff when that has nothing to do with the dialogue. Richards is a burden to the LA Kings at 5.75 m and three other centers ahead of him. End of discussion. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilsFanDrew Posted June 4, 2014 Share Posted June 4, 2014 (edited) I have to agree with Vanflyer here. At this point Carter is the better player and fits in with the Kings better than Richards. Richards lack of offensive production is not a one off. He has been declining ever since he got to LA. I know this will ruffle some feathers but Mike Richards has always been a little overrated. He's a very good player but he's not great. There is no particular skill set that he possesses that makes him great. I wouldn't say Carter is a great player either but if you are objectively looking at it based on recent performance you can't come to any other conclusion other than Carter is trending up and Richards is trending down. Going off stats from 3-5 years ago to make the case that Richards is a better player is a fools errand. Professional sports are a what have you done for me lately business. Edited June 4, 2014 by PhilsFanDrew 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.