Thoughts?

Of course, if you believe that he was a shill for the Kings before yesterday, then yeah, you have no reason to believe otherwise.

He’s also been critical at times where we all are with players and coaches in the past but he’s always been FAIR. There’s a big difference in HOW you point out criticisms.

I’ve read Rich’s blog for a couple of years now and we have absolutely no reason to doubt Rich’s integrity in any way.

Essentially, you’ve written him off entirely before he’s even started.

Re: the injury scenario, I was referring to a tactical advantage that the information might give their opponents. Example: In the game before the pivotal game to decide whether the Kings make the playoffs or not, Ivanans is in a scrap and suffers an “upper body contusion”. You discover that he actually has a concussion which will keep him out of the game. The information that the Kings’ enforcer will not be active for the pivotal game would allow their opponent to healthy scratch their enforcer and call up the kid from their farm team who has been tearing up the AHL for the last 2 months. IMO, you could ethically release that info if you chose to – I don’t think an employee of the Kings could.

Re: Shill – IMO, His objectivity has degraded in the last year and the Williams trade disinformation episode damaged his credibility. http://www.insidesocal.com/kings/2009/03/trade-details-2.html
Shill is a strong word – I think I’d be happier with cheerleader.

If the primary purpose of his employ is to report line combinations from practice and discuss who won the ping pong tournament, etc. – that’s perfectly fine, but I don’t see that as journalism. I won’t expect frank discussion of anything controversial, i.e. the potential sale of a minority interest to the Boston group, the uproar over the raising of season ticket prices last summer, or even the negative reaction to “Rinkside View”. It’s good for Rich, but I don’t see the up-side for us.

I base my comments and concerns on what we’ve seen come out of the Kings during the entire AEG era. I vaguely remember their attempt to open a fan forum on their website in the 90s. I think it only lasted about a week before they realized that controlling the comments was going to be impossible. The TV, radio, and post-game broadcasts have specifically avoided discussing anything controversial. Comments critical of the on-ice product have been extremely limited with absurdly giddy support of the status quo. To expect them to suddenly bring in someone who could potentially publicly dispute the official company line is unrealistic.

They won’t censor him – they won’t have to.

In the specific case you mentioned, I can’t see why that wouldn’t be reported.

Regarding the financial terms, he has agent’s phone numbers and, based on what is reported in the story, he should be able to publish terms and dollar amounts. That’s what that independence thing is.

Of course, we won’t know for sure until it all gets started and he develops his “new” reputation on the Kings web site. But based on what is out there now, from the Kings and from Hammond above, outside of the deep distrust of AEG, there is no basis for accusing him of being a Kings’ shill.

BTW: I’m asking a question, not making a comment or accusation.

Will he be forced to follow the team’s policies, as in “Per club policy, terms of the agreement were not announced”?

What happens when going into a crucial game, impact player X is questionable with an “upper body injury”, but Rich hears through the grapevine that it’s really much more serious specific injury and that there is no chance that he will play?

Will the control freaks in the Kings front office allow Comments?

If anything, we should worry about the Kings moving away from their commitment to his independence, forcing him to move on. But as of right now, that does not appear to be a problem.

I have to admit… under usually circumstances I would be wary of this kind of arrangement. The whole “conflict of interests” thing seems to be there for everyone to judge. But this is a little different.

Hammond has built up a tremendous amount of trust with his readers over the years. He was always good with the quotes and the fact; but that’s not what made his blog special. Hammond was able to set himself apart because while he was reporting the facts, you got the impression that he genuinely CARED about the Kings.

Its the trust and passion that give me confidence that the move will be for the best. I trust that he’ll do a good job… and I trust that passion that he’s always conveyed will continue to come through… no matter WHO is signing his paycheck.