Thank you.

Yeah, he should be about a 60-65 point guy. Players always have 1 or 2 random excessive seasons. Like Carter's 84, or Briere's 96, or Gomez scoring 33 goals. I just feel some people see Richards as more then he is kind of like what happened with Drury in NY. His career high was 69 points (37 goals) and he got paid over 7 million per season for this. Then when he didn't match his career highs and basically posted his average numbers people freaked out. (Same with guys like Briere and Gomez)

He had a similar weird slump last season. He had 47 points in his first 50 games with 17 goals but then ended the season with 19 points in 31 games with 6 goals. He then followed it with only 1 goal in the playoffs last season. Not as ugly a slump but a weird one in a key spot. I wonder if his physical play is cashing checks his body can't afford.

So what's your point?

Richards was only an 80 point guy when he was quarterbacking the PP on the point with Timonen. Normally ~65 points is probably what to expect

Are you really comparing Richie to ten year old milk? That might not be your best argument.

As a Flyers fan, the trade didn't make sense to me when it was made. Not because I didn't think that there was value in the deal, but because Richards was the face of the franchise and only a year before had a central part in almost winning a cup.

Simmonds is simply a better player than I thought we were getting. He is definitely benefiting from playing with all that talent, but in the end not every guy runs with it the way he has. I thought we were getting a 20-20 guy and instead I think we have a 30-30 guy.

The Flyers do miss Richie's defense, without a doubt. I suspect he may be declining offensively into a 50-60 point player. The only thing that would worry me about him moving forward is his health. He never trained the way he should given his style of play and I don't know that his frame can handle the kind of punishment he puts it through. I've always attributed his slumps to his body wearing down.

Simmonds is turning into Hartnell Jr. perfect compliment to skilled players

Wayne Simmonds scored his 19th and 20th goals tonight. Mike Richards has ONE in his last 22 games. Guess what? It's NOT THE PLAYERS! The coaching sucks and I can't take it anymore.

This is from Dancing Boy, not even me!

It can't be from you, because that is our argument.

When Simmonds first came in I thought he was between his two buddies Anthony and Chris Stewart....now, he is proving to be better than both and making half as much as Chris.

One season doesn't make a career. I think your original assessment still holds true for now. Chris has proven a lot more than Simmonds, while obviously Anthony is in serious doubt at this point. Points does not conclusively equal quality of player or individual capability. That is like saying Mike Green is a far superior defenceman than Lidstrom because he scored more goals than Lidstrom ever did in 2009. Not to compare Simmonds or Stewart to such a duel, but merely to point out that they both are bore from the same argument. Very little context or substance.

You wouldn't believe how often I have this argument with fellow Flyers fans. Everyone in Philly loves to announce us as the "winners" of that trade because of the offensive production of Simmonds and Schenn thus far, while completely neglecting the fact that our defense is in the bottom third in the league and is directly related to moving Richards and Carter. We have one center capable of playing defense (Talbot) and he's not a guy you want playing 20 minutes a night.

While our defense unravels us early in the playoffs, I hope you guys can pull it out of your ass this year. I'll be rooting for you.

This is just funny. Mike Richards set the wheels in motion in that 3-0 comeback when he leveled Krejci and knocked him out of the series. That was the turning point, not Gagne coming back. Secondly, he was a beast in the Montreal series. The Finals at Chicago... well that was just a cluster F. I'm not looking up stats to try and fit into my argument, I'm just going off memory.

Even last year, in the playoffs which we were so 'humiliated' that the franchise decided to give up on him, it was Richards's line that scored the game tying and overtime game-winning goals to force a game seven in the buffalo series. He was huge for us at every turn of his career, all the while facing the stiffest competition and being asked to shut them down. To downplay that is an injustice.

There's no point in arguing with facts with a couple of these posters, the rest of us know the Krejci hit was the turning point. The fact is he had a phenomenal few months starting with the Olympics right through to the end of the playoffs. Philly will have to score 4+ goals a game in the playoffs to make up for the lack of defence. The defensive liabilities are glaring and that's a direct result of Richards, Carter and Powe all being moved.

One thing that bothered me with trading Simmonds is that Lombardi always says he wants players who have "LA Kings" stamped on there butt.

Well, Simmonds made the team at 19 while sleeping on Lombardi's couch and borrowing his truck. He showed up in LA and did what he had to make the team and become a solid NHL'er and LA King. He stepped up and fought O'Brien in the playoffs when it looked like no one was going to answer the bell after O'Brien was running everyone that series and game in Vancouver. I also remember him slamming his stick against the boards during last years playoff series loss. Wayne was passionate, he wanted to be a King and wanted to win...and we traded him.

i have a really bad feeling the same is going to happen with Jonhson. a passionate guy that wants to play for LA and win, he even took a lower, team-friendly contract because he wants to stay in LA. now DL is dangling him as bait for a winger...i wonder if its going to send a message to the other players who are signed in long-term

I can agree with that, but it comes down, you have to give to get. Pretty sure if there was any way around it, Simmonds would have stayed, but Simmonds was far from a throw in in this deal.

Hey look, Johnny Utah. They made a thread on the main board just for you: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1110523

Not quite the way I see it but I guess everyone’s entitled to their opinion. However, let’s not let the facts get in the way of an opinion, so just to clarify these points:

Mike Richards was the “worst” on-ice skater for the Flyers in the 2010 SCF finals; the absolute “worst” on the 19 man roster. A description of a Selke finalist, a player who, in just about everyone’s’ mind, plays extremely well in the defensive zone, yet skates well enough to get back into the offensive zone to score 60-80 points a season and still is one of the best PK specialists in the league. If he keeps doing that, he can wear bed-room slippers on the ice for all I care. If he was the “worst” skater for the Flyers, the Flyers would have won the final series in 4 games against the Blackhawks, no problem.

Did Team Canada need Richards- yah Canada could probably place two teams in the Olympics that would each do very well and perhaps for this country, winning gold is nothing amazing. But realistically we’re talking about a player who played for two world junior team Canada’s, winning one gold medal with a team he captained and coming within one goal of another. On the Olympic gold medal team, he played with Nash and Toews, probably the team’s most effective line, with Toews winning the tournament MVP while scoring the first and only goal for Canada in the final in straight time, assisted by Richards. Don’t think Crosby played all that great in the tournament (he admitted so later), except for the golden goal, so I expect Team Canada could probably have done as well without him also.

Did the Phantoms need Richards in their 2005 Calder Cup win- probably not but let’s remember that Richards came to the Phantoms off three OHL series, the last against London which won the Memorial Cup, during which he scored 28 points in 15 games. He came to the Phantoms and scored 15 points in 14 play-off games, second on the team, I believe, next to Carter’s 23 in 21 games. Sure, maybe the Phantoms win without Richards but could you guarantee that?

Kitchener Rangers won the 2003 Memorial Cup when Derek Roy was captain- very true but you neglect to mention that Richards was the team’s leading scorer that year and was also a Memorial Cup Tournament All-Star. The Rangers may not have even got by the Plymouth Whalers that year, except for Richards’ game winning goal in the 7th and deciding game. Richards went on to captain the Rangers for 2 years and to this day, remains one of their best liked players.

Correction 2- Really!- The Devils with 103 points, were seen as underdogs against a Flyer team that came within a shoot-out goal of missing the play-offs, had only 88 points and were trying to establish a new high tempo system under a coach brought in about a third of the way thru the season. The Flyers actually tied with Montreal for 7th place but got the 7th seed because Montreal won more games with the shoot-out. My recollection is that the Devils were favoured in 6, maybe 7 games, Flyers goal-tending being very suspect at the time.

Correction 3- Not a close series but you forget that Richards assisted on the first goal and scored the game winner in a narrow 2-1 win in the first game. Then tied at one game apiece, game three was won by Philadelphia on an O/T goal assisted by Richards. NJ wins that game (or the first game) and the series maybe goes the other way.

Corrections 4 and 5- Simon Gagne returns and plays a key part in the 4 game, 3 goal comeback against the Bruins. True enough but again, beyond the hit delivered by Richards on Krejci which seemed to turn series momentum, Gagne scores the must win O/T game winning goal in game 4 with an assist by Richards, Richards scores the first goal and assists on the GW goal in a 2-1 Philly win in game 6 and Richards assists on the fourth GW Philly goal in game 7. As for goal-tending between Rask and Thomas, who can forget the never-ending goaltending issues faced by the Flyers when Leighton was brought in halfway thru game 5. It all balances out in the end. Gagne certainly was a big part of the comeback but Richards easily had the most to say about the final out-come and, had the Bruins prevailed, all that followed would have been moot.

The Habs Series- Flyers didn’t win the series 5-1 but did win in a 5 game series. The stars and moon aligned for the Flyers when the Canadiens upset both Washington and Pittsburgh but if Richards doesn’t have the absolutely great game he had in the deciding game 5 (who can forget the short-handed “shift” which essentially broke their backs while adding a goal and 2 assists), Montreal wins, Halak gets hot again and it’s maybe a different out-come.

Corrections 6-8- still a team sport where all the assets need to be clicking together for success. Team leadership is not determined by an individual and I’m sure that players like Briere, Timmonen and Pronger all added their qualities to those of Richards. Would the Flyers have been as successful had any one of those been missing in action?- maybe and maybe not. However I do re-call Danny Briere and others indicating that as the play-offs went on, they all tried to follow the example set by Richards, shift thru shift. Most good leaders lead by quiet example and I put Richards up with Toews, Stall and a host of others in that list.

Correction 9- Both Toews and Richards played tired in the final series, both having played well during the Olympic tournament. The Chicago series went to O/T in two games; they’re still looking for the winning goal in game 6. Four of the six games were decided by one goal and a few bounces the Flyers’ way may have resulted in a different outcome. Had the Flyers won, the Conn Smyth would have went to Briere or Richards; Leino wasn’t even in the equation.

When hockey players, scouts and managers talk of Mike Richards as being a strong two way player who plays both ends of the ice with passion, is hard to play against and can chip in 60-80 points; those are the experts whose opinions one should listen to. The level of disrespect for Richards shown by some Flyers/Kings fans and a few Philadelphia media types are beyond belief and almost libellous. Every hockey person who has played with or been on the management side of teams Richards has been associated with has had nothing but good things to say about him and the level of success those teams enjoy, a large part of which can be attributed to his play. IMO Paul Holmgren had no desire to shop Richards before trading him- that for sure came from Ed Snider. So let’s slow down on the rhetoric; as I’ve said before, I hope that Simmonds and Schenn turn out to be great players but come back and talk after they turn 25 years of age and see where they’ve led their teams by then.

I love how I started a thread about how upset I was about the Richards deal and I was flamed, warned and outcast by mod's and posters alike except one other....now, in this thread more and more people are starting to say the exact same thing....

Richards does not get a free pass because of his linemates. Simmonds is producing on the 2nd line and 3rd line and produced even on the 3rd line in LA. Richards is on the 2nd line, penalty kill and power play and has been wildly inconsistent. This is not the player I heard so much about for years. It was no worth it for the assets we gave up. I would take that trade back in second especially if we miss the playoffs and they decide to replace everyone and blow up the team. Better to rebuild for start fresh with a 20 year old and 23 year old on short term RFA deals than a 27 year old with 9 years left.

I am Willing to give Mike Richards more time. But we need The Mike Richards, that was the guy in the Stanley Cup run.

WE need him like Ten days ago. I think Putting Brown back with him is a good move by Sutter.

Pretty sure Mike's point, goal streak was with Brown on the line.

I disagree, I'd make that Richards trade 100 times out of a 100. Philadelphia plays a different system than LA. LA's system is putting the puck on the net and trying to poke it in.. Simmonds is having a great year but he's also played with Giroux sometimes and Briere, two pretty good playmakers and he's getting power play time and Philadelphia has a pretty decent power play compared to the Kings.

Two different situations from Richards and Simmonds. You have your opinion on that trade and what's happened and you're entitled to that, but me personally I still think it was a good trade for both teams, Kings just need to figure out a way to score goals as a team. Not just Richards.

Total Even Strength Points Scored during the 09-10 and 10-11 Seasons:

KINGS
Kopitar 96
Brown 81
Simmonds 69
Williams 66
Smyth 62
Stoll 53
Doughty 53
Handzus 49

FLYERS
Briere 89
Carter 86
Giroux 76
Hartnell 69
Richards 68
JVR 64
Pronger 38


* Simmonds also played in less games during that span, and had less ice time.
* Richards was a combined +9, while Simmonds was a combined +20

So even under the Flyers more offensive minded system, Richards couldn't outproduce Simmonds who was playing in the Kings more defensive minded system.

Are we really arguing about Simmonds and Richards now?

Lets wait and see.

You live in your own world where three people agreeing with you gives you vindication. Most of this thread and just about all of the main board already told you otherwise, the only people still talking about this are the ones on your side because the rest just don't care, this team has a lot more things going on than Mike Richards.

Bottom line, complaining about one player 5 months into the next 8 years while every single player on the team is putting up terrible dilapidated stats as well is asinine. It is compounded by the fact that he received a concussion and missed 8 games, and even so he is still 2nd in goal scoring on the team... It is like Richards is working his butt off in hockey Antarctica and Simmonds is sipping Mai Tais in the Carribean, then you run in and complain about how hard Simmonds has it versus Richards.

Look, we all know you went through a bad breakup, but just because Simmonds was a fan favorite doesn't mean that Richards won't be. We gave up a great third line winger and a promising second line center prospect for one of the best premier two-way centers in the league. It's done, won't be reversed, and most have enjoyed it, and no one in the league or media disagrees with it.

There is no way we are rebuilding if we miss the playoffs. The management, staff, and system will likely change, but there won't be a mass exodus of players. Losing Simmonds isn't what dropped us to 30th in the league, and neither is our roster compilation.

Need I remind you that you are betting against one of the best players in the league. It is like saying Kopitar is a bum and will never reach 80 points again. Obviously, that's not true, and when the team functions again offensively, it will be obliterated. You can't honestly sit there and say that this team will never produce again in the next 8 years because of the past 3 months. Obviously he will rebound, then where will you go? What will you do? Who will you complain about? Probably the fourth line again. Eventually we will acquire a new bottom 6 hockey god for us to worship and emulate.

The only numbers I really care about is total points.

Richards - 128 pts
Simmonds - 70 pts.

You can pick stats to look however you want. If you look at even strength points, for instance, Wayne is doing worse this season than his sophomore season.

On the other hand, most fans (yourself included) will NEVER admit that the Richards trade was a mistake no matter how things turn out.

I think it is fair to say that if the Kings don't "win" the trade in the next 1-2 years then it could go down as one of the worst deals in franchise history. This deal was designed to get the Kings to the SC and nothing less. We'll see how the reality turns out.