Is Rob Blake the Problem?

[SettlementRichie10]

It's absolutely hyperbole, you say it's obvious, yet you use smoke and mirrors to describe that season, HOW is that obvious? You say the core was spent, but you talk about 3 on 3 records.

Hindsight is always 20/20, and you had 50/50 chance of being right or wrong, anything other than that, cmon man, seriously?

How much more evidence do you need?

The core was rapidly aging and regressing statistically across the board. We had missed the playoffs in 2015 and gone out in embarrassing fashion in 2016. There were absolutely zero high end prospects on the horizon. We lost Lucic to free agency. We were up against the cap. No depth. No future. No present.

It was obvious the team was not going to get better than 2016. And if they weren't going to get better than losing in the first round 4-1, then they should have been rebuilt.

I don't know why this is so controversial to you. It just is what it is.

 

[SettlementRichie10]

Okay cool, congrats??

I'm sorry man but I'm so sick of these "they should've started the rebuild in 2016" people. Do you realize how absolutely absurd that would have been at the time?? Fans would have gone absolutely bat **** crazy if they had blown up the team in 2016 and started rebuilding. A team that had just brought 2 stanley cups to Los Angeles. Some of you are still upset about losing Clifford... Imagine if they had traded players like him, Toffoli, etc in 2016!!!! It would've been a total **** storm. For all you know management could've known they needed to rebuild just like you back in 2016 but was told not to do so by ownership.

I mean, in 2015/2016 people were still debating whether the Kings and Hawks were each dynasties. DYNASTIES!!! Not just cup contenders... DYNASTIES, MAN.

Ownership had an on-ice product that had been extremely successful and was selling really well. From a business perspective, it would have been incredibly dumb to start a rebuild back in 2016 even if that's what would've been best from a hockey perspective. And at the end of the day it's a business. Ownership was probably just trying to milk the team's success for as long as possible.

Basically what I'm saying is good for you but even if they had seen all the signs like you apparently did, a rebuild in 2016 probably wasn't even remotely a possibility (and it's not what happened) so get over it.

I'm not saying it would have been an easy decision. But it would have been the right decision.

Call me crazy, but I haven't exactly enjoyed these last five years of Kings hockey.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I'm not saying it would have been an easy decision. But it would have been the right decision.

Call me crazy, but I haven't exactly enjoyed these last five years of Kings hockey.

You’re not alone. But let’s be realistic and fair, it would’ve been impossible to start with a blank canvas in a capped world.

 

[BigKing]

For real, you're all acting like we didn't just turn over our prospect pool in literally two years. That's insane. Not only have we been getting high picks, but we've been hitting on so so many of them. This isn't just luck

They haven't hit on anything yet. There are zero Rob Blake draft picks playing in the NHL. Agree that it looks good on paper but it is still unproven.

Blake has had three drafts. Quick search of past rankings (maybe someone can do a better job to try and get apples-to-apples) and I get this from fall of 2015 to fall of 2018. This means the ranking includes four drafts instead of three since I need to include the 2015 draft since it factors in to the Fall '15 rankings but its the best I can seem to find right now:

2015:
Colorado at 30.
Rangers at 27.
Carolina at 24.
Blues at 22.

2018:
Colorado at 8.
Rangers at 5.
Carolina at 3.
Blues at 7.

Granted, this allows for four drafts but I'm sure you will see similar growth over three drafts if that team keeps all of its picks while also acquiring an additional 1st round pick and two more prospects due to selling off a legit NHL player.

Hell, the Fall 2018 list had the Kings at #12 so they had already climbed a good amount just because they used all of their picks in 2017 and '18.

I'm glad all of the picks have been kept and that additional ones have been acquired. I'm excited to see how these kids pan out but this isn't some sort of magic trick. Right now, the real bit of slick drafting was the trade up for Fagemo. There is a lot of BPA going on which, I agree, is better than taking Forbort of Lewis but it also plays real well in to prospect pool rankings: especially when you aren't far removed from the draft.

I'm not knocking Blake for any of this because it is the right thing to do: I just disagree that it is insane how quickly he has turned it around because it has been done before and, most importantly, we don't know how the ranking will lead to tangible results. But yeah, I'm excited to watch it unfold just like everyone else.

 

[Choralone]

It is going to take several years before we know if any of these picks turn out to be quality professional players, so let's be patient with praise or criticism. Literally anybody - anybody here even - could sit back, tank, and use quality draft picks to select good players on paper. Let's see how they are molded.

We can't feel a little good that two independent journalists rate our draft pool as tops? We can't give Blake any praise for that because he'll read this thread, his head will get big, and he'll... I'm not sure what. The Kings hit a milestone - #1 prospect pool. Sure, things could all go wrong, but it's like not praising a kid for getting good grades because it's not guaranteed he'll get a good job when he graduates.

 

[BigKing]

I actually don't think Blake was lying to the fanbase. I think he actually believed the Kings could compete for the Cup at that time. Obviously he was wrong about that, and paid for it with Kovalchuk and two coaches.

He gets no points for being a sucker in my book, but let's not paint him as a liar without any evidence.

This is my big critique of Blake as GM: he horribly misdiagnosed what he inherited which has led him to not do anything that the majority of us can agree is a good move until the Muzzin trade. I fully agree that he thought they had a contender and a rebuild was not what he thought he was signing up for. The guy was the AGM during the '14 Cup and even played with Brown and Kopitar. As a former player and King, he certainly is not the guy that is going to jump at the chance to start breaking up the Cup guys until he absolutely had to. Lombardi gets lambasted for loving his guys too much and being too loyal but Blake was right there with him in how he felt, so much so that he went out and got them more help with Kovy after hiring the nice guy coach they all wanted. To be fair, I'm not upset with him for thinking these guys could still do it just like I don't blame Lombardi for being so loyal; however, these guys have to see two moves ahead though and not be stuck in the past or else any of us on here could be the GM.

Now, perhaps he has learned from all these NHL level mistakes but we won't know until he has to once again make moves at the NHL level that are based upon trying to win games as opposed to tanking. Since his only track record at the NHL level are his mistakes, you can excuse those of us that are highly skeptical.

He could totally be the guy but believing so is based upon faith as opposed to track record. If those of us that are skeptical of Blake can be painted with the "Hate Blake for 2001" brush, then I can use the "Big fan of Blake as a player" brush for those that appear to have blind faith in him.

 

[Peter James Bond II]

What would actually be possible scenario - Blake steps down / fired and whoever takes the GM spot inherits the best base of prospects / picks in the league and gets lucky
IF Vilardi, (possibly Turcotte) Kaliyev, Fagemo, Bjornfot step in next season and actually contribute and start moving the pendulum in the right direction...like Vilardi
has 50 pt rookie year, Kaliyev scores 20 goals...Fagemo plays like Iafallo's first year - looking like a pro....Bjornfot slots #2 LD and plays as well as any 19 yr old D....and Petersen takes over and wins 30 games.
Not entirely impossible. The new GM will be sitting pretty and just have to ride out moving / waiting Carter / Brown etc to be gone. The new GM will reap what Blake put in motion. (and honestly Yannetti)
And if the Kings win the lotto, is handed Lafreniere. (or at least Stutzle, Byfield)

 

[tigermask48]

He gets no points for being a sucker in my book, but let's not paint him as a liar without any evidence.

Well then he's bad at evaluating and identifying a competitive NHL roster and thus bad at his job.
It really is one of those two things. He's either a liar towing the company line, or not a good NHL GM.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

, these guys have to see two moves ahead though and not be stuck in the past or else any of us on here could be the GM.

.

Would love to see what you think are examples of this......

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

How much more evidence do you need?

The core was rapidly aging and regressing statistically across the board. We had missed the playoffs in 2015 and gone out in embarrassing fashion in 2016. There were absolutely zero high end prospects on the horizon. We lost Lucic to free agency. We were up against the cap. No depth. No future. No present.

It was obvious the team was not going to get better than 2016. And if they weren't going to get better than losing in the first round 4-1, then they should have been rebuilt.

I don't know why this is so controversial to you. It just is what it is.

It was obvious??? Ok,

2016-2017 - 6 points out, Kopitar 52 points
2017-2018 - Made the playoffs (BETTER than 2016-2017), Kopitar 92 points...

I mean, I guess since it was OBVIOUS they weren't going to get bett....oh crap...you mean they did??

This is what I am talking about, you are telling the future from the past......you are looking back NOW and saying, it's OBVIOUS they weren't going to get better, then, holy shit, they did get better, so apparently, it wasn't obvious.

 

[crassbonanza]

Lombardi gets lambasted for loving his guys too much and being too loyal but Blake was right there with him in how he felt, so much so that he went out and got them more help with Kovy after hiring the nice guy coach they all wanted. To be fair, I'm not upset with him for thinking these guys could still do it just like I don't blame Lombardi for being so loyal; however, these guys have to see two moves ahead though and not be stuck in the past or else any of us on here could be the GM.

The issue is that the consequences of Lombardi's actions and Blake's actions are not comparable. Lombardi being too loyal cost the team a number of high draft picks/prospects and dead cap that will extend to 2036 among other issues. Blake's error cost the team the Kovalchuk cap hit for this season and next. One had no serious long term consequences, the other had fairly severe and long lasting repercussions.

 

[Choralone]

Blake's views of the roster he inherited were probably heavily colored by Lombardi - his boss and mentor. I imagine he thought they had one more run left in them if he could add more pop to the offense. If he had blown up that team right off the bat, he'd have been pilloried by the majority of fans, and he probably didn't have a mandate from ownership anyway.

Let's be real - Blake saw the ages of the players on his team and knew there would be a rebuild during his tenure. He just thought he had a little time to add and subtract pieces over a few years but remain at least a low-seeded playoff team at worst (technically, a "contender" since they could still sneak in the playoffs and something something catch lightning). That the team suddenly cratered caught him (and If we're honest, us) by surprise and forced him to accelerate plans and attempt a complete rebuild. The fact that a lot of veterans are still here is no surprise considering their big contracts and shit performance - there's no market for them.

 

[Axl Rhoadz]

The issue is that the consequences of Lombardi's actions and Blake's actions are not comparable. Lombardi being too loyal cost the team a number of high draft picks/prospects and dead cap that will extend to 2036 among other issues. Blake's error cost the team the Kovalchuk cap hit for this season and next. One had no serious long term consequences, the other had fairly severe and long lasting repercussions.

Let's NOT forget that Lombard was 'too loyal' because the players he was rewarding WON US TWO f***ING STANLEY CUPS. Good god, people.

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

Blake's views of the roster he inherited were probably heavily colored by Lombardi - his boss and mentor. I imagine he thought they had one more run left in them if he could add more pop to the offense. If he had blown up that team right off the bat, he'd have been pilloried by the majority of fans, and he probably didn't have a mandate from ownership anyway.

Let's be real - Blake saw the ages of the players on his team and knew there would be a rebuild during his tenure. He just thought he had a little time to add and subtract pieces over a few years but remain at least a low-seeded playoff team at worst (technically, a "contender" since they could still sneak in the playoffs and something something catch lightning). That the team suddenly cratered caught him (and If we're honest, us) by surprise and forced him to accelerate plans and attempt a complete rebuild. The fact that a lot of veterans are still here is no surprise considering their big contracts and **** performance - there's no market for them.

Exactly, He's in the spot then, where Pittsburgh is now, minus Crosby/Malkin talent....

 

[GoldenBearHockey]

It was obvious??? Ok,

2016-2017 - 6 points out, Kopitar 52 points
2017-2018 - Made the playoffs (BETTER than 2016-2017), Kopitar 92 points...

I mean, I guess since it was OBVIOUS they weren't going to get bett....oh crap...you mean they did??

This is what I am talking about, you are telling the future from the past......you are looking back NOW and saying, it's OBVIOUS they weren't going to get better, then, holy ****, they did get better, so apparently, it wasn't obvious.

Pretty sure I done screwed up what I meant to say, you are telling the past from the future....I think.

 

[crassbonanza]

Let's NOT forget that Lombard was 'too loyal' because the players he was rewarding WON US TWO ****ING STANLEY CUPS. Good god, people.

I'm just explaining the difference. Blake not going into a rebuild immediately did not cost the team as much as Lombardi going all in every deadline.

 

[BigKing]

The issue is that the consequences of Lombardi's actions and Blake's actions are not comparable. Lombardi being too loyal cost the team a number of high draft picks/prospects and dead cap that will extend to 2036 among other issues. Blake's error cost the team the Kovalchuk cap hit for this season and next. One had no serious long term consequences, the other had fairly severe and long lasting repercussions.

Yeah, but it also provided the greatest moments of our fandom.

Blake didn't change course until he was staring at last place. We should all be thankful that these guys sucked so bad that they forced Blake to start the rebuild earlier than they wanted to, something that Luc readily admitted to.

This isn't about the overall results of the errors but the decision making in the first place. To simply say "Blake's errors are not a big deal because they were going to suck anyways and it is Dean's fault that they suck" gives him a complete pass on being wrong. This being wrong is what concerns those of us that are skeptical. Regardless, the constant comparisons to Dean are stupid since Dean trounces him in a landslide regardless of how bad he was at the end. I'm not saying that is Blake's fault since he simply doesn't have the track record but it is disingenuous to continually compare the two when the comparison is based solely on Dean's last three seasons and the fact that Blake hasn't traded draft picks except for Torrey Mitchell.

Simply keeping picks and using them isn't a special skill. Now, it appears they have used the picks wisely so credit Blake and Dean's scouting staff if they pan out. If not, keeping Dean's staff is going to look pretty ridiculous and Blake will be out of a job.

 

[BigKing]

Would love to see what you think are examples of this......

Trading Demitra immediately
Trading Visnovsky for Stoll and Greene
Rob Scudreri "over payment"
Dealing O'Sullivan for Williams
Giving Mitchell the extra year

This is just some Lombardi stuff. As for being reactionary, that pretty much summarizes Dean's downfall as he lost sight of the future while trying to chase the past which, to be fair, was a very recent past.

The Kings were the 2nd worst team in the league in Blake's 2nd season as GM. He was completely blindsided. I don't care about the arguments why that isn't his fault because I can argue for why Dean did ultimately stupid shit as well: the bottom line is that they were wrong and GMs generally don't get to hold their positions for very long if they are wrong a lot of the time.

Anyone can look at scoring three goals in four games in a playoff sweep and just go "Just add scorer" without taking in to account everything else. That is reactionary, HF Board level roster management. Now, if AEG was forcing the continuation of milking the golden cow then I'd give Blake some slack there but, as it stands, it was his move. You and I have been down this road before but, again, we should all want a visionary and not a paint-by-numbers GM. Blake has firmly been the latter. Maybe he is actually an artist but he hasn't been a step ahead of anything so far.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Reactionary would’ve been trying to save the season by trading a first and futures for a quick fix, which Blake did not do. He signed a free agent forward who didn’t work out. If that’s his biggest failure, so be it.

And we’ll start seeing whether or not having the best prospect pool in the league pays off in the next couple of seasons.

 

[crassbonanza]

Yeah, but it also provided the greatest moments of our fandom.

We are not talking about that time period. When people lambast Lombardi for being too loyal they are talking about not compliance buying out Richards. They are talking about going all in at every opportunity despite where the team was at.

Blake didn't change course until he was staring at last place.

He switched from retool to rebuild when they were in last place, which is a far cry from going all in.

To simply say "Blake's errors are not a big deal because they were going to suck anyways and it is Dean's fault that they suck" gives him a complete pass on being wrong. This being wrong is what concerns those of us that are skeptical.

Blake made low risk decisions, which didn't pan out, but since they were low risk they did not hurt the team. His decisions the whole way centered upon restocking the pipeline and he has continued that.

based solely on Dean's last three seasons and the fact that Blake hasn't traded draft picks except for Torrey Mitchell.

Simply keeping picks and using them isn't a special skill.

Standing by your plan does take a special skill. When the Kings were rolling with Kopitar having a Hart worthy season, I don't think many people would have blamed him for going all in, but he had a plan and stuck to it.

Regardless, the constant comparisons to Dean are stupid since Dean trounces him in a landslide regardless of how bad he was at the end.

You brought up Dean. You were the one complaining that Dean gets ripped for trading the cupboard away while Blake gets nods of approval for restocking the pipeline. Nobody else was making the comparison.

 

[Lt Dan]

It was obvious??? Ok,

2016-2017 - 6 points out, Kopitar 52 points
2017-2018 - Made the playoffs (BETTER than 2016-2017), Kopitar 92 points...

I mean, I guess since it was OBVIOUS they weren't going to get bett....oh crap...you mean they did??

This is what I am talking about, you are telling the future from the past......you are looking back NOW and saying, it's OBVIOUS they weren't going to get better, then, holy ****, they did get better, so apparently, it wasn't obvious.

Bingo.

It's easy to play Monday morning quarterback. I think any other GM would have also played the hand the same way Blake did

 

[Peter James Bond II]

Reactionary would’ve been trying to save the season by trading a first and futures for a quick fix, which Blake did not do. He signed a free agent forward who didn’t work out. If that’s his biggest failure, so be it.

And we’ll start seeing whether or not having the best prospect pool in the league pays off in the next couple of seasons.

And honestly, Kovalchuk started with 14 pts in 15 games (something like that) and was fitting in fine. It's after WD came on, things went South...putting him on 3rd and 4th lines and scratching him.
He's showing he can still play. 12 pts in 14 games PLUS 6 and 3 GW goals. Only one of his 6 goals is a PP goal. He's scoring even strength, OT goals and shootout goals too.
I know I have said it like 5 times, but I honestly feel if he was playing with Kopitar, he would stil be here and would have scored 50+ pts last year and this year.
But Cpt Anze wants to play with Iafallo. Despite that, no player should make a final call who they play with; that's a coaching decision.
So this Kovalchuk 'failure' is more of how he was misused here, than a Blake failure.

 

[BigKing]

delete

 

[BigKing]

We are not talking about that time period. When people lambast Lombardi for being too loyal they are talking about not compliance buying out Richards. They are talking about going all in at every opportunity despite where the team was at.



He switched from retool to rebuild when they were in last place, which is a far cry from going all in.



Blake made low risk decisions, which didn't pan out, but since they were low risk they did not hurt the team. His decisions the whole way centered upon restocking the pipeline and he has continued that.





Standing by your plan does take a special skill. When the Kings were rolling with Kopitar having a Hart worthy season, I don't think many people would have blamed him for going all in, but he had a plan and stuck to it.



You brought up Dean. You were the one complaining that Dean gets ripped for trading the cupboard away while Blake gets nods of approval for restocking the pipeline. Nobody else was making the comparison.

1 - Richards decision kicks off the time frame I mentioned.

2 - Were they "retooling"? I think they were just trying to keep winning with what they had. Trying to make the playoffs every year and drafting in the 20s doesn't really mean "retool". I think they were just going to try to win as much as possible with the core--somewhat out of necessity--and not trade picks/prospects unless it was for someone with term that could help extend the window of "just get in and see what happens". there wouldn't be a Lucic type deal but a Patches type one was on the table.

3 - So has he done anything? Low-risk decisions? He's had the job for almost three seasons and he hasn't had to do anything? That kind of supports the argument that he isn't anything special since, as long as he keeps his draft picks, nothing else matters.

4 - He would have been ripped apart if he went all in at the 2018
deadline. He's actually lucky Carter got hurt or else he might have gone all in without Carter's return being his deadline deal. Regardless, he did trade a draft pick for trash Torrey Mitchell so he was tinkering for the present at the expense of the future since we'd all rather have that 4th round pick. More to the point though, many Blake supporters would fault him for going all-in during that year; if they didn't, they would all be hypocrites anytime they faulted Dean for doing the same.
Also, did he stand by his plan? What was the plan? If standing by your plan is a special skill, then Dean was very special since his failure to pivot during his last three years got him fired. I'm actually glad Blake moved off of whatever the plan was with the Muzzin trade and most everything that has followed.

5 - I bring up Dean because most of the praise for Blake comes at the expense of trashing Dean's final act, primarily because there isn't much to praise Blake for but its easy to say "At least he hasn't done x". Great. He hasn't stuck a fork in the light socket, been electrocuted and then did it again. I'm glad he hasn't been an incompetent mess but he also hasn't done anything to deserve strong support. He has been a giant "meh" which makes it easy to shit on him if you don't like his history with the franchise and easy to strongly support him if you are a fan of his.

 

[tomd]

I will continue to maintain that AEG will not be as patient as most people here seem to think...the Kings are not the orphan children they were in the 70s. They are two time SC champions now. Combine that with what the Lakers, Clippers, Dodgers, and Rams are doing and it is pretty clear that this city only loves and supports winners. AEG cannot (or more correctly will not) wait 5 years for a chance that the team may be competitive. I think AEG gives the organization until next summer to start showing some measurably improvement ON the ice. If not, I think they'll bring in a new GM with the goal of reaching the playoffs ASAP. That doesn't mean trading off picks and prospects but it will mean actually TRYING to improve the product on the ice.