The reason I'm so dismissive is because I still don't get the sense that you've even tried to understand or in fact even acknowledge my critique. I've laid it out in other threads. I've listed players, draft years, free agent signings, trades... I've been pretty thorough in presenting what I think is an alternative C option to your A or B argument and I've never once felt like it was even acknowledged much less refuted.
I don't think you're dumb and I don't think you don't know what you're talking about. I think you and others you argue with are missing an explanation for something you consider to be a problem.
Welp, I've responded to your critiques and thought I had even apologized when you felt like you weren't getting heard or recognized. And if I didn't apologize, then I apologize now. Either way, if your preference is to be dismissive and mocking for cogent but disagreeable arguments, then have fun.
From what I recall, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, you feel the issue is more stemmed from 1) a combination of not having the best picks 2) not having it be a priority of management to bring in top young players considering the core they had 3) organizational prioritization of defense first and having grinding forwards (primarily during the Lombardi years). The reason I do not subscribe to this line of thinking is because:
- Teams can still develop top-line players outside of the first round. If a team NEEDS a high pick in order to hit, then there's something wrong.
- Blake is approaching his sixth offseason now. He has been with the Kings in a management position since 2013. He has had plenty of time to reflect, evaluate, and implement his vision for a successful organization. And for the good work he HAS done, there is a glaring hole that has yet to be fixed at a convincing level.
- Blake and Co. have frequently talked about "opening up" the game, playing with pace, and having the game more fun, because players love to score goals. Yet, we're not seeing results yet in the pipeline.
And the scary thing is there's talks of missing the playoffs next season, but it could be a GOOD thing, because the expectation is the young players will be much more productive.
Heck, if there is that type of surge from the prospects where they produce like top line players, it would absolutely lessen the sting of missing the playoffs... though that would also imply the veterans would have a severe enough drop off to cause the playoffs to be missed, leading to a concern of contracts.
The explanation for circumstances, in my opinion, are only valid for so long.
But hey, it could also be that Blake doesn't put as much focus on offense. Picking players like Clarke, Vilardi, Kaliyev, etc would be a very odd decision if that were the case. But I'd at least credit him for picking players who fit in his vision if offense isn't a priority.
