I think that was the worst mistake he made, and thankfully some sense was talked into him by Taylor and Andy Murray to keep the "C" on. But to play devil's advocate, let's put ourselves in a similar scenario. Say you've been in a marriage for 12 years, then your spouse approaches you to tell you that you have to give more in the relationship and if you don't, they're going to divorce you and there is zero room for compromise. That's how the negotiations were approached by AEG.
1) That's how pretty much all failed (and some successfull) negotiations go. They ALL end with a take-it-or-leave-it offer - and in fact it's by both the team and the player. It wasn't unique to Blake or the Kings. The thing is that nobody, at least since expansion, has ever resigned the Captaincy over it. And most players don't go public with those negotiations, which Blake did again and again until the Kings finally had to respond.
2) What do you think of Blake's tactic in 2008 of giving the Kings a take-it-or-leave-it offer of $4M? Goose...Gander...?
Now I agree that Blake did not handle it professionally, but I could also understand why he was taken aback by the Kings' approach when they presented the offer with a firm ultimatum if he did not accept the contract under their terms and their terms only. They were not interested in the least bit in negotiating. An even bigger joke is that they did eventually move from their ultimatum and kept increasing their offer as the season progressed, but the damage was already done by that point and Blake felt that he was not wanted by the Kings.
1) But that offer was after they had already raised and raised and raised their offer. Eventually all negotiators reach a final number. Of course, sometimes pressures change and what someone thought was "final" really wasn't. But anyone who says DT didn't believe the "final offer" really was "final" is calling DT a liar...and I don't believe that to be the case. I've talked to him far too many times and while he wouldn't always tell you the truth, he never ever lied...he just would say.
2) Being offered a contract that was the 2nd highest in the NHL is BY NO MEANS a signal that you aren't wanted. That's just BS. They just didn't want to pay 20% of their payroll budget to one guy.
It's also sad to read how Taylor pretty much came off as just a puppet to Leiweke and AEG. He was more of the middle man doing damage control in trying to patch things up and calm things down to get Blake back to the negotiating table while Leiweke, Gilmore, and AEG dictated the negotiations. It was under their orders as to how much Taylor would be capped at to get Blake re-signed and they set their own deadline to determine when to move him had he not been signed.
Not really. I don't know if you've ever talked to DT but I have and so have friends of mine. DT was given a budget and was allowed (just as DL was) and was allowed to spend it as he chose. Had he wanted to get more $$ in the budget to pay Blake, he could have. And they didn't set the NHL's trade deadline...the NHL did.
I would also like to bring up how often the Kings back then would have significant players miss parts of camp due to them holding out. This was a common occurrence under AEG.
It was common in the NHL...not just with the Kings.
Remember how Norstrom wasn't re-signed until the day before the start of the regular season?
Yup.
Aki Berg returned to Finland for a full season which may have actually stunted his development (not to mention the piss poor handling of him as a teenager, you could include Jokinen and countless others as well).
What's funny about that is that the #1 reason he went back to Finland (and my friends in Finland backed it up) was because he didn't want to continue playing in the AHL. He wanted to play in the NHL and get paid like he was...so he bolted. It was a rash, terrible, immature decision that helped ruin his career. Berg's contract problems that year were 100% on him.
Storr, Matt Johnson, Stumpel, Blake, etc. For some reason, contract negotiations were never easy during that period. I'd say it is more fair and sensible to find both parties equally at fault. You have to keep in mind that AEG didn't show any loyalty to players back then, and it's been well documented that it wasn't just their handling of Rob Blake that proves this to be true.
But that's how the NHL was back than...again, it wasn't unique to the Kings. Unless you were willing to WAAY overpay a player (the Avs with Sakic, Forsberg, Roy & Blake...the Rangers with Leetch), he'd hold out (the Ducks with Kariya) or you'd have to trade him (Bure, Tkachuk, Weight). It's why NJ was a revolving door of players (Guerin...Rolston...Holik...Arnott) and what ultimately led to the 04-05 lockout.
And that is why I'm thankful that Lombardi took the job here. Also keep in mind that before accepting the job, Lombardi was warned that they (AEG) wouldn't give him carte blanche to run the team as he saw fit. Thankfully Leiweke relented and gave Lombardi freedom to run the team as he envisioned it to be and not Leiweke's vision of how the team should be. Remember how often he talked about getting a star to play at Staples Center? His interest wasn't about building a successful team, it was only about dollars and cents. Come up with a stupid catchy slogan, spend money on marketing, and sell a pseudo five-year plan as if he's interested in building a winning culture here. That never came to fruition until Dean Lombardi stepped in.
Ok, I don't know where you got this info, but I was at DL's 2nd breakfast and spent about 30 minutes with him and a bunch of other people (I still have the audio recording). And straight from DL's mouth, here's what he said: He asked TL which of 3 ways he was going to be asked to run the team: 1) be happy making the playoffs and making money - don't worry about winning the Cup; 2) go into full rebuild from the ground up; or 3) rebuild on the fly - make the playoffs and rebuild at the same time. DL wanted #2 but TL told him no way...do #3.
So DL did that...and failed so miserably at it after 2 yrs that the Kings had no options but to go into full rebuild. If he had actually been good at the job he was hired to do, there would have been no full rebuild...and likely no Cup. But it was NOT his plan, he failed and fell into it. DT's problem was that he did the job he was hired to do too well - but couldn't build the kind of developmental system DL has...in part because AEG was still paying off McNall's debt until even after Blake left.
