Confirmed with Link: Avs GM Chris MacFarland to Preds as President of Hockey Operations

[Softball99]

Here's an unbiased breakdown of Blake's LA tenure. CMAC probably brought hum for his strengths and bets he will have final say and not let the bad be repeated.
Rob Blake's front-office tenure with the Los Angeles Kings is one of the more polarizing cases in recent NHL history. A fair assessment is that he was a good builder but an incomplete finisher.

The Good

1. He successfully rebuilt the prospect pipeline

When Blake became GM in 2017, the Kings were aging out of the championship core built by Dean Lombardi.

Under Blake, the organization developed or acquired a young core that included:

Quinton Byfield

Adrian Kempe

Mikey Anderson

Brandt Clarke

Alex Laferriere


The Kings went from a declining veteran team to one with one of the NHL's deeper prospect pools. Even many critics admit the organization became significantly healthier long-term under Blake.

2. Regular-season results improved dramatically

Over eight seasons as GM:

309-238-71 record

Five playoff appearances

Franchise-record 105 points in 2024-25

Four consecutive playoff berths to end his tenure


If you compare the Kings of 2018-20 to the Kings of 2024-25, they're unquestionably a better hockey team.

3. Strong asset management in several trades

Blake made a number of under-the-radar moves that aged well.

Examples include:

Acquiring Kevin Fiala

Acquiring Phillip Danault in free agency

Turning the disastrous Pierre-Luc Dubois situation into goalie Darcy Kuemper, which salvaged significant value.


4. Modernized hockey operations

After taking over, Blake expanded development, sports science, nutrition, strength and conditioning, and mental-performance resources. The Kings became one of the more modern organizations in player development.


---

The Bad

1. Zero playoff series wins

This is the giant black mark.

The Kings made the playoffs five times under Blake.

They won zero playoff rounds.

They lost:

Vegas (2018)

Edmonton (2022)

Edmonton (2023)

Edmonton (2024)

Edmonton (2025)


Four straight eliminations by the Oilers ultimately cost him his job.

2. The Pierre-Luc Dubois disaster

The trade for Pierre-Luc Dubois is widely viewed as Blake's worst move.

Los Angeles:

Traded significant assets

Signed Dubois to a massive long-term contract

Watched him struggle almost immediately


Although Blake later recovered value through the Kuemper deal, the original trade is still considered a major strategic mistake.

3. Never solved the elite-star problem

The Kings became good.

They never became dangerous.

The roster often felt like:

Deep

Structured

Defensively responsible


But lacking a true game-breaking superstar comparable to:

Connor McDavid

Leon Draisaitl

Nathan MacKinnon


The Kings repeatedly ran into teams with elite offensive firepower and couldn't match it.

4. Coaching turnover

Blake hired:

John Stevens

Todd McLellan

Jim Hiller


McLellan stabilized the rebuild, but the organization never found a coach who could push the group beyond its apparent ceiling.


---

Assistant GM Era (2013–2017)

This part is often overlooked.

Blake joined as Assistant GM and VP of Hockey Operations in 2013. The Kings won the 2014 Stanley Cup Finals during that period. However, Dean Lombardi remained the architect of that championship core. Blake contributed but wasn't driving roster construction yet.

Assistant GM Grade: B+

Good contributor to a championship-era front office, but not the primary decision-maker.

General Manager Grade: B

Rebuild: A-

Prospect development: A

Regular season: B+

Trades: B-

Playoff performance: F


Overall Verdict (95/5)

If you ask Kings fans today, the split is roughly:

Positive view (45%)
"Rob Blake rebuilt the franchise, left it in better shape than he found it, and the next GM gets a strong foundation."

Negative view (55%)
"He had eight years, never won a playoff round, made one franchise-altering mistake with Dubois, and couldn't get the team over the hump."

My assessment: Blake was a successful rebuilder but not a successful contender-builder. He raised the Kings from the ashes of the 2012–14 Cup era, but he never completed the final step from "good team" to "serious Stanley Cup threat."

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Athletic did nice article on Blake a few months back. Smart organizations don’t have an all knowing Trotz making decisions, they have multiple guys whose perspective adds value. Regardless of what you think of his work as GM, Blake can help us.

Here is link to the article: Rob Blake’s reset: Former Kings GM on holding himself accountable and preparing for another shot

 

[nine_inch_fang]

Athletic dud nice article on Blake a few months back. Smart organizations dint have an all knowing Trotz making decisions, they have multiple guys whose perspective adds value. Regardless of what you think of his work as GM, Blake can help us.

Here is link to the article: Rob Blake’s reset: Former Kings GM on holding himself accountable and preparing for another shot

If he's humble enough to hold himself accountable and learn from his mistakes then who am I to doubt MacFarland hiring him as a number 2?

Still haven't heard Trotz or Brunette admit to any mistakes.

 

[ibleedkings]

Here's an unbiased breakdown of Blake's LA tenure. CMAC probably brought hum for his strengths and bets he will have final say and not let the bad be repeated.
Rob Blake's front-office tenure with the Los Angeles Kings is one of the more polarizing cases in recent NHL history. A fair assessment is that he was a good builder but an incomplete finisher.

The Good

1. He successfully rebuilt the prospect pipeline

When Blake became GM in 2017, the Kings were aging out of the championship core built by Dean Lombardi.

Under Blake, the organization developed or acquired a young core that included:

Quinton Byfield

Adrian Kempe

Mikey Anderson

Brandt Clarke

Alex Laferriere


The Kings went from a declining veteran team to one with one of the NHL's deeper prospect pools. Even many critics admit the organization became significantly healthier long-term under Blake.

2. Regular-season results improved dramatically

Over eight seasons as GM:

309-238-71 record

Five playoff appearances

Franchise-record 105 points in 2024-25

Four consecutive playoff berths to end his tenure


If you compare the Kings of 2018-20 to the Kings of 2024-25, they're unquestionably a better hockey team.

3. Strong asset management in several trades

Blake made a number of under-the-radar moves that aged well.

Examples include:

Acquiring Kevin Fiala

Acquiring Phillip Danault in free agency

Turning the disastrous Pierre-Luc Dubois situation into goalie Darcy Kuemper, which salvaged significant value.


4. Modernized hockey operations

After taking over, Blake expanded development, sports science, nutrition, strength and conditioning, and mental-performance resources. The Kings became one of the more modern organizations in player development.


---

The Bad

1. Zero playoff series wins

This is the giant black mark.

The Kings made the playoffs five times under Blake.

They won zero playoff rounds.

They lost:

Vegas (2018)

Edmonton (2022)

Edmonton (2023)

Edmonton (2024)

Edmonton (2025)


Four straight eliminations by the Oilers ultimately cost him his job.

2. The Pierre-Luc Dubois disaster

The trade for Pierre-Luc Dubois is widely viewed as Blake's worst move.

Los Angeles:

Traded significant assets

Signed Dubois to a massive long-term contract

Watched him struggle almost immediately


Although Blake later recovered value through the Kuemper deal, the original trade is still considered a major strategic mistake.

3. Never solved the elite-star problem

The Kings became good.

They never became dangerous.

The roster often felt like:

Deep

Structured

Defensively responsible


But lacking a true game-breaking superstar comparable to:

Connor McDavid

Leon Draisaitl

Nathan MacKinnon


The Kings repeatedly ran into teams with elite offensive firepower and couldn't match it.

4. Coaching turnover

Blake hired:

John Stevens

Todd McLellan

Jim Hiller


McLellan stabilized the rebuild, but the organization never found a coach who could push the group beyond its apparent ceiling.


---

Assistant GM Era (2013–2017)

This part is often overlooked.

Blake joined as Assistant GM and VP of Hockey Operations in 2013. The Kings won the 2014 Stanley Cup Finals during that period. However, Dean Lombardi remained the architect of that championship core. Blake contributed but wasn't driving roster construction yet.

Assistant GM Grade: B+

Good contributor to a championship-era front office, but not the primary decision-maker.

General Manager Grade: B

Rebuild: A-

Prospect development: A

Regular season: B+

Trades: B-

Playoff performance: F


Overall Verdict (95/5)

If you ask Kings fans today, the split is roughly:

Positive view (45%)
"Rob Blake rebuilt the franchise, left it in better shape than he found it, and the next GM gets a strong foundation."

Negative view (55%)
"He had eight years, never won a playoff round, made one franchise-altering mistake with Dubois, and couldn't get the team over the hump."

My assessment: Blake was a successful rebuilder but not a successful contender-builder. He raised the Kings from the ashes of the 2012–14 Cup era, but he never completed the final step from "good team" to "serious Stanley Cup threat."

Brother from a Kings fan take it from me, I'd say 85% of us have a negative view of what he did to the organization. We went from having a jaw dropping prospect pool to literally nothing now. And it all happened under his watch.

His biggest blunder's were trading Vilardi and drafting Bustfield. The Kings are a woke organization and had to take him and look how that backfired.

He's also super arrogant and always never answers a question directly. I guess he's not completely in charge so you guys might not be doomed to the max.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

If he's humble enough to hold himself accountable and learn from his mistakes then who am I to doubt MacFarland hiring him as a number 2?

Still haven't heard Trotz or Brunette admit to any mistakes.

Exactly.

 

[Olderfan]

My goodness, we got the new GM; Trotz is gone. New day and I’m not going to criticize his first move. He wanted Blake, Ok, must be a reason. Poile, Jr gone, Ok.
Trotz gone, Poiile, Jr gone, Blake hired; Day 1. Can’t wait for Day 2.
The re-build has begun!

 

[herzausstein]

“Poile had a voice in fiscal and strategic planning; player and staff personnel decisions; player contract negotiation and salary arbitration. As the team’s director of hockey operations, Poile managed the club’s roster; player payroll; team budgets; salary cap; statistical and competitive analysis departments; training and equipment staffs; NHL Central Registry administration; NHL Collective Bargaining Agreement compliance and the department’s day-to-day business operations.”

That is from press release announcing his departure.

CMac probably going to try and rebuild our players statistical analysis group

 

[Legionnaire11]

and drafting Bustfield. The Kings are a woke organization and had to take him and look how that backfired.

Not only does this come off as something other an unbiased hockey analysis, but it's 100% hindsight. At the time of the 2020 draft, Byfield was the consensus #2 prospect and seen as a potential franchise stud. After the Rangers took Lafreniere first, every other team would have gleefully drafted Byfield in the second spot, in 2020 that happened to be the Kings.

 

[glenngineer]

I saw something yesterday where CMac was wanting to bring Blake to the Avs next season so this move makes sense. Could also be why Sakic and the Avs let him walk because maybe they didn't want Blake.

Good leaders, whether it's GMs, coaches, etc, hopefully learn from their mistakes and don't make them again, especially if they're teamed with other minds. Belichik is the first one that comes to mind, awful when he went to the Browns and then went on the run in New England. Granted, it was the Browns but something clicked for him.

On the flip side, you have plenty of folks that never learn from their mistakes because their egos won't let them, Jerry Jones being the perfect example.

Where will Blake fall in this? Not sure but the guy has won a Cup as a player, is a HOFer and has experience as an AGM and GM. Here's the other piece about him being a GM, if he was "that bad", why didn't the Kings org let him go sooner? Not saying he doesn't have his warts but if this guy was so freaking bad, his term would've ended much sooner than it did.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Interesting... quietly, Brian Poile has been removed from the official hockey ops staff listing?

Hockey Staff | Nashville Predators

The official National Hockey League website including news, rosters, stats, schedules, teams, and video.

www.nhl.com

 

[glenngineer]

Interesting... quietly, Brian Poile has been removed from the official hockey ops staff listing?

Hockey Staff | Nashville Predators

The official National Hockey League website including news, rosters, stats, schedules, teams, and video.

www.nhl.com

How so, he walked away yesterday and it was on X.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

How so, he walked away yesterday and it was on X.

Sorry, didn't see that posted here yet.

 

[glenngineer]

Sorry, didn't see that posted here yet.

No worries. Lots going on the last couple of days.

 

[Kat Predator]

On Blake: he very clearly took a couple of big swings on getting that physically dominant C with PLD and Byfield. In hindsight, those moves blew up in his face. At the time though, they were calculated moves. It's the Joey argument all over again. Sometimes a GM takes his shot and not every shot hits the back of the net.

 

[Armourboy]

On Blake: he very clearly took a couple of big swings on getting that physically dominant C with PLD and Byfield. In hindsight, those moves blew up in his face. At the time though, they were calculated moves. It's the Joey argument all over again. Sometimes a GM takes his shot and not every shot hits the back of the net.

I'm not sure how calculated PLD was, everyone thought he was the wrong player for them right from the minute the rumors started. PLD had done less with more opportunity than any guy I can remember lately. You don't trade for those guys, give them a big contract, and live to tell the tale about it.

 

[Armourboy]

Not only does this come off as something other an unbiased hockey analysis, but it's 100% hindsight. At the time of the 2020 draft, Byfield was the consensus #2 prospect and seen as a potential franchise stud. After the Rangers took Lafreniere first, every other team would have gleefully drafted Byfield in the second spot, in 2020 that happened to be the Kings.

Doesn't change the fact they were wrong. Part of your job as a GM to snuff out the guys who everyone thinks should be drafted somewhere and instead get the guy that actually turns out to deserve to be drafted there. I don't see " everyone else would have " as a valid excuse. If you are just going to follow the consensus then what do you need a GM for?

 

[nine_inch_fang]

Doesn't change the fact they were wrong. Part of your job as a GM to snuff out the guys who everyone thinks should be drafted somewhere and instead get the guy that actually turns out to deserve to be drafted there. I don't see " everyone else would have " as a valid excuse. If you are just going to follow the consensus then what do you need a GM for?

This is the Legwand arguement all over again.

I don't know how that draft class worked out but could you imagine what would have happened if Blake went off board with that pick?

 

[Armourboy]

This is the Legwand arguement all over again.

I don't know how that draft class worked out but could you imagine what would have happened if Blake went off board with that pick?

I mean would it have turned out any worse than it did?

Stutzle, Raymond, and Sanderson were drafted in 3,4, and 5, so he wouldn't have needed to go that far off the board to have turned out better.

 

[Armourboy]

Keeping Brunette as head coach and on bench decision maker = good

Hiring Blake to replace the Poile lineage as what amounts to a glorified AGM = bad because he was a bad GM but a good AGM before that.

Goooooot it.....

Also wanted to address this simply because it's not really what anyone is saying at all ( unless they are on ignore and I can't see it ).

It's more like keeping Brunette as a stop gap until you get the coach you really want = tolerable, not good.

If the timing is going to line up better people can tolerate one more year of the stupidity instead of firing him and just taking whatever is floating out there. Under any other reasoning Brunette needs to be fired.

Blake was a bad GM, and I've yet to see any real proof Blake was good at AGM other than the credit he is receiving for what the GM did.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Also wanted to address this simply because it's not really what anyone is saying at all ( unless they are on ignore and I can't see it ).

It's more like keeping Brunette as a stop gap until you get the coach you really want = tolerable, not good.

If the timing is going to line up better people can tolerate one more year of the stupidity instead of firing him and just taking whatever is floating out there. Under any other reasoning Brunette needs to be fired.

Blake was a bad GM, and I've yet to see any real proof Blake was good at AGM other than the credit he is receiving for what the GM did.

I don't see keeping Brunette as a stop gap as even "tolerable". Why is THAT perspective so hard to fathom? He's an awful coach, and a lot of us have realized that. I don't have any tolerance whatsoever to keeping him, even in some kind of bogus "stopgap" capacity?

 

[NoNecksCurse]

I'm thrilled to move on from the Poile/Trotz era and see the organization take a different path. I'm not trying to be overly critical of the two. They accomplished a lot and gave the franchise a lot of great memories, but every organization eventually reaches a point where a fresh perspective is needed.

What I struggle with is how we tend to judge GMs and front offices. We see the outcomes, but we have very little insight into the information they actually have when decisions are made. Fans tend to view team building as a straight line when, in reality, there's a tremendous amount of uncertainty and luck involved. Draft picks develop or don't. Players exceed expectations or regress. Injuries change everything. The difference between a great move and a bad move is often something nobody could have predicted.

Brunette will be gone at some point, too. Coaches come and go, executives come and go. What matters to me is whether the organization is willing to evolve instead of staying attached to the same people and the same way of doing things indefinitely.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Well, tbh I don't even like that Poile and Trotz are listed in token "senior advisor" and "advisor" roles? I doubt they will have any real input and I'm sure those designations are 100% bogus titles left over from some kind of legacy organizational desire to honor them or whatever. I know it's harmless. But still. I'd say cut the fat entirely? You don't really need to keep paying guys just for legacy reasons and nothing else? Who even cares about that? None of us fans do, that's for sure. Nobody is buying a ticket to a Preds game because they gave honorary titles to Poile and Trotz, right? And they have made lots of money in the game already, I'm sure they're not hurting. So what's the point?

 

[Kat Predator]

Well, tbh I don't even like that Poile and Trotz are listed in token "senior advisor" and "advisor" roles? I doubt they will have any real input and I'm sure those designations are 100% bogus titles left over from some kind of legacy organizational desire to honor them or whatever. I know it's harmless. But still. I'd say cut the fat entirely? You don't really need to keep paying guys just for legacy reasons and nothing else? Who even cares about that? None of us fans do, that's for sure. Nobody is buying a ticket to a Preds game because they gave honorary titles to Poile and Trotz, right? And they have made lots of money in the game already, I'm sure they're not hurting. So what's the point?

Could just be something about the contract that they signed? Instead of paying them a lump sum or bonus to "get rid of them", ownership just puts them in a box and moves them into the storage area, something similar to Indiana Jones. Or maybe they keep an "office" in the building replete with buckets and mops and a bare light bulb that goes on and off when the door is opened and closed respectively?

 

[Armourboy]

I don't see keeping Brunette as a stop gap as even "tolerable". Why is THAT perspective so hard to fathom? He's an awful coach, and a lot of us have realized that. I don't have any tolerance whatsoever to keeping him, even in some kind of bogus "stopgap" capacity?

Because I'd rather have an awful coach for one year, than a garbage retread for another 3 years. That's why I said if there is a guy he likes that available now then absolutely fire Brunette. If it's going to take a year to get that guy because of some kind of contract situation I'm more than happy to wait. This team is a bubble team at best Brunette or not.

Basically it stems from what we got into when we fired Lavi. We got stuck with Hynes for several years because we just wanted to fire the coach.

 

[Softball99]

On the Blake thing. He is NOT a GM, AGM, anything GM. He's VPOHO. He's doing what he's good at. Development. The only GM is CMAC. Damn Chicken Littles. The job he was hired for here he did very well in LA