Nope, Absolutely not.

Where is the HELL NO option?

If blake really loved the kings, he would have tried much harder to sign. If blake had any thoughts of being a coach or gm with the kings, he would have tried much harder. If blake really cared about his kings legacy, he would have tried much harder. Blake simply doesn’t care very much. Then simply do NOT retire his jersey.

Where is the Hell “expletive” No option?

he a hall of fame defenseman base on what because he win a Stanley cup with Colorado or because of what he did with kings the last two season. When i look at a hall of fame he shouldn’t have a year or 2 years like blade have with kings. just base on the two years he have with the kings he shouldn’t be consider to be a hall of fame at all.

Before this week, guaranteed.

After this week, NOT for a long, Long, LONG time.

If Rob Blake has even one-half a heart, I’d imagine he’s already regretting his (most selfish) decision.

=) Hey Rob, enjoy San Jose, ya hoser!

How can this organization ever be respected if they think people like Blake are the epitome and role model of what every King should be like; thus retiring his number? Blake’s number up on the wall means that we want all our young kids to look up to and try to be like Blake.

Gretzky, Vachon, Dionne, Robitaille, Taylor: okay. let the kids play for the Kings like they did. No problem. Rob BLAKE? HELLLLL NO.

I too will stop being a Kings fan as I will no longer respect this organization if they deem Blake a role model for our kids.

Absolutley NO !!!! There are two teams: Colorado and San Jose which can do this.

list of Kings whose numbers i’d prefer to be retired instead of blake’s:

#9 bernie nicholls
#22 ian laperriere
#21 tony granato
#14 matty norstrom
#7 tomas sandstrom
#33 marty mcsorley
#55 pavel rosa
#40 barry potomski
#43 vitali yachmenev
#42 dan bylsma

I can think of someone much more deserving of having their number retired first, Butch Goring anyone?

Hell, I can think of quite a few much more deserving of havving their numbers retired before Blake. Bernie Nicholls, Tony Granato, Adam Deadmarsh anyone?

Blake has had 2 nasty divorces with the Kings where he’s said one thing and did another and bolted for more money.

Say no to retiring Blake’s number.

What a ravenous fan base.

I think RB knew when DL would not sign him for 4m that his jersey would never be retired as a King. But RB will make it into the Hockey hall of fame.

Cheers

I think Doughty should get #4 as Blake was a guy he really liked growing up. It would mean a lot to Doughty. Doughty really likes #8 too from juniors but will have to negotiate with Ellis over that one. Maybe buy him a watch or something.

Give Hickey another cool # like #14 or #33. Can’t remember if #6 is available these days. Greene’s gonna get #2 it seems, but that’s Teubert’s # from juniors. First come, first served.

There is a 2nd # I think is very cool that’s not been worn since Pushkarev a couple seasons back: #9. I think Kelly Buchberger wore it before “give me the puck” Pushkarev did.

It’s a classy #. More designed for a forward than D.

I think Rob had some good years when surrounded with good talent, but hall of fame career? I don`t think so. The last five years he`s been average at best. My vote is a difinite NO!

Also, I don’t think if you look at the stats of HoF defensemen (not to mention players whose #s have been retired), you won’t see many (or any) who were literally the worst defenseman on their team some seasons. Even if you’re going to argue that Blake was playing on a bad team (which sometimes he was and sometimes he wasn’t) when he was -20 or -30 he was the worst +/- on the whole team and close to if not actually at the bottom of the entire league.

But he did get paid a lot. I’m sure if you make a list of highest paid defensemen ever, he would be at the top of the list. Maybe they can have their own building.

NO!!! When DL signs Modry he should be given #4. The Kings will be bad this year, so I dont know how much of my hard earned money I will be spending on them. However, I will be purchasing a ticket to a game against the Sharks to boooo the heck out of JR and Blake! What a waste of 17 million dollars!!!

Not Now. NEVER. If they want to raise numbers to the rafters, here’s a few:

#9 Bernie Nichols: Single-season team record for goals with 70

#11 Charlie Simmer: “The Career Minor Leaguer”. Why not have the entire Triple Crown Line enshrined?

#32 Kelly Hrudy: behind Vachon, the 2nd most successful goalie in Kings history (all due respect to Mario Lassard). Only goalie to advance this team past the 2nd round.

#19: Butch Goring: 1st Fan-Favorite. Last player to be carried off the ice by his teammates, in that memorable series with Boston.

Blake’s #4 should not be retired. Nor should he be given any position in the Kings Organization after his playing days are over (Thankfully, that shouldn’t be long now).

But, if the #4 was to be retired; I would prefer that the #4 be retired with Giles Marotte or even Jim Fox (Yes, he wore that number for a short time.) Blake doesn’t deserve squat from this orgainization.

If blake gets a jersey retired, it should have $ instead of numbers on it. Maybe the Kings should create a Hall of Shame to balance out with the Hall of Fame. I nominate Rob Blake to be the first inductee in the player category. I will withold judgement on who gets inducted from management, for right now.

As for who should have their number retired before him. Look at the Kings Hall of Fame. Which player listed there doesn’t have his number retired?

#19 Butch Goring. It is a travesty that it has been done long before now.

Other players to retire before #4 would include:

#9 Bernie Nicholls
#21 Tony Granato
#5 Harry Howell

Just my opinion, your mileage may vary.

LOL – you just love stirring the pot on this, don’t you Rich?

Although I blame this week’s events more on Lombardi, I still vote no. It would be pretty embarassing to have a guy get booed at his jersey retirement ceremony.

no. sorry. if we’re gonna retire a recent d-man’s number, retire norstrom’s #14. ask any kings fan which of the two meant more to this team, and you’ll get the same answer every time.

(anonymous lurker and kingsfan19: good ideas, but don’t forget we have to save #5 for aki berg!)

Jay Bouwmeester #4

=D

Either officially or unofficially the #4 should not be worn by another LA King. Look back upon some of the worst players – especially defensemen – who wore that number. Jerry Korab comes to mind.

When I was at the first game Blake played for the Kings wearing the #4, I was scared that he was going to be another loser player. Thankfully he wasn’t. But I’m not sure that all of the bad play is out of the number.

PLEASE do not give to any rookie!!! I’m afraid he won’t play well for the Kings, get traded and be another player that gets to play for Lord Stanley’s Cup with another team. Do the names Larry Murphy, Darryl Sydor, and Rob Blake come to mind.

Hey! I own #5!!!

There’s a kid up in Calgary …. I think is name is Enuff, nooo Stuffit …. nope not that either …… ohhh I got it Phaneuf ..I’d take 1/2 of a Phaenuf over two Blakes.. he’s already 5 times the DMan Blake ever thought about being and he’ll win more Norris trophies then ONE and that was a gift, Hall of Fame maybe …. but I’ve seen guys that Blake wouldn’t even be allowed to pick their hockey bag up that were more deserving of the Hall then RB will ever be. And all you guys who think just because your name is on the Cup it’s automatic that you go to the Hall, you better check out the list of all the Cup winners …….. WHO AREN’T IN IT.

how about retiring fukufuji before blake? or kariolynin (sp?),

Rob Blake is unquestionably a great player. He is likely to play better this coming season than last season.

Lombardi unquestionably blew it.

But Blake does not get a pass on responsibility, nor does Brisson. He/they could have made a deal. In light of his last tenure with the Kings, he did owe the team.

To take the money that he took from the Kings for this last stint for what he gave, he should have worn a mask and had a getaway car.

Blake is a one note player Me Me Me Me Me.

For those who say that Blake is a sure fire hall of famer, how do you figure? IMO you need to be considered the best or one of the best during the era. He was very good for about 10 years and even great for a couple of seasons, but never elite.

When you think of elite hall of fame d-men during Blake’s career, you think of Bourque, Lidstrom, Coffey, Chelios, Pronger, MacInnis, Niedermeyer, guys like that. One guy that I don’t consider elite during his time that did enter the hall was Larry Murphy. But he was very good throughout his 20 year career and he did play over 1600 games and score over 1200 points.

Blake on the other hand, was never a great defensive player, which all the above mentioned players were except for Coffey (but we all know it wasn’t his defense that got him in the hall).

So to sum it all up, no he’s not a hall of famer, and no his number should not be retired. The latter due to a combination of the his non HOF status and his history with the organization/fans.

Captain Material,

Well thought out and orated. Can’t find one point I disagree with. Wish I had command of the English language to communicate as you have. Well said.

Where’s the I don’t care button?

Where’s the I just want the Kings to win, or a least get better button?

Where’s the I just want all King fans to come together and unite, in creating one KingNation button.

Lets forget about the buttons that divide us, and concentrate on the buttons that unite us.

Enough about Blake already!

Captain Material: As you can see the fan base here has digressed into a mob mentality at this particular moment in time.

I assume it will eventually pass but not until the mob has taken its toll on the RB situation and then have found something bigger and better to beat on.

As far as I am concerned it begins with the current Kings ownership and their ability show and propagate leadership throughout their organization.

The fan reaction is just a byproduct.

Cheers

Less than what?

Come on Quisp, this is clearly willful misunderstanding by you and flat out dishonest. Gosh, I dont know, maybe less than the price the market set for him? You can not be serious with that as an argument; thats just game playing.

Yes, if you just do what Brisson saysI don’t think he was impatient because I don’t think he wanted to stay.

Yeah, why argue the merits of what people say, when you can just cast them as black and white figures, one evil and one good. Brisson is one of those greedy evil agents, so instead of addressing what he says, lets just not think at all.

Spector has a good read over on his site in his soap box about player salaries and the root cause that speaks to this kind of thinking somewhat.

What was up in the air Quisp? Both sides clearly knew the role the guy would play and the term of the contract. No one is arguing that, right? Both sides agree. The only thing left was the amount, so why wouldnt this have gone quickly? This also conveniently ignores that the team could have started negotiating well prior to July 1. No one is saying it was Blakes side stalling that, right? I mean tell me if Im wrong here. According to both sides if anyone wanted to get a deal done in a timely fashion it was Blakes side, not the Kings.

But of course that doesnt support your he didnt want to stay argument. If thats the case Quisp, riddle me this: why on earth would he sign here to begin with and want a no-trade clause? According to you, not only does this guy have to have nefarious ulterior motives, but they have to rapidly change on the fly to fit your argument.

Instead of getting the answer which is simply supported by everything everyone involved has said (which should be the most correct if you believe in the veracity of concepts like Occams Razor), no, you think the truth lies in complicated reading deep between the lines and ignoring certain facts that just dont fit with it. Him not wanting to be traded doesnt mean he wants to stay, it means he wants to go. Him giving the Kings the opportunity to sign him for less than hes being offered elsewhere doesnt speak to loyalty or a desire to come back, it means hes greedy and is looking to move. Ridiculous. Plainly.

See his quote on ESPN about “not being into all that rebuilding anyway.”

What quote? That was a completely unsupported assertion which was sandwiched between actual quotes from the conference call which everyone is referencing in the media without the one you are pointing to. And you arent even getting it right as to whose quote its suppose to be, right? ESPN was implying this was second had from Wilson, right? And again, they offer no solid accounting for it; its just thrown in there unquoted between other documentable statements that dont support it. And pardon my own prejudice, but ESPN doesnt even cover hockey anymore. This is probably something a poker player said.

This is a great example of what Im talking about with people like you stretching just as far as they can to try and manufacture an argument by assembling some bits of information that support their preconceived objective and ignoring other things instead of examining the actual facts and basing their opinion objectively off of that. We are rather intellectually lazy as a society

but that’s not the same as “wanting to stay with the Kings” or “being loyal to the Kings.”

I did speak directly to this in my previous comment, but I guess I just dont have the same definition of loyalty some people have. I think hes displaying loyalty by wanting to be here with the clear prospect of not winning anything. I think hes displaying loyalty by being willing to take less money to play here, and even waiting around a number of days at the start of free agency when there are bigger offers out there for him on the table.

If not, doesnt it make the most sense for him to sign with SJ on July 1 immediately? Or even come and ask LA to match or beat the offer? He didnt do either of those things, and again, he even was willing to stay here for less money than he was offered. To me that says loyalty.

I think the standard some people have, including you, that he has to wait around for a month (You cant be serious right? Yeah, its only money and that has no place in a business. That theres a laugher! There is a place for loyalty in business dealings, but that standard you set is deserving of ridicule.), accept multiple millions less, and even wait around after being told the team is looking for other options and hes not actually their first choice, goes well beyond what is reasonable for loyalty.

To me he clearly displays loyalty to the team by giving them the opportunity to sign him for below market value and by even giving them days to make that call. Say thats not loyal enough for you, fine, but the loyalty neutral argument is plain BS. Thats about you wanting to hate, not about you being reasonable with the facts.

I’m happy he’s gone

Yet you seem to be on a mission to also paint him as greedy and disloyal and all kinds of bad guy. How many posts did you have in the past few days dissecting why every word the guy said had some underlying meaning pointing to him being deceptive and straining to make clear how everything implied him trying to make the team look bad and such? Seriously, go look at the comments; theyre littered with you taking great efforts in interpreting what was said and done instead of taking things at face value (despite the fact that taking things at face value does give a simple clear explanation). Okay, youre not protesting too much at all

Hmm. Well, I have played the game for the last forty years

Ive only been doing it for about twenty, but unlike you I never made the NHL or went pro. Did you ever get a chance to play for an original six team? That would have been an honor. Are you on the HoF selection committee by any chance, because I would love to hear what the thought is behind Vachon not getting proper consideration? Blah blah blah

My point clearly is you dont hear anyone but fans throwing out this BS. Tell me its not true. Please speak to the actual point. I hear people all through the hockey world (the NHL, not the local beer league in case thats not clear) talk of this guy with reverence and respect. And its not that people are prone to say bad things in general, but what they do is not say anything when thats the case. People say plenty positive about Blake. And again, its odd how pretty much every GM would like this guy on their team (again, including ours).

Im not here to make the case for Blake as a HoFer. Im just here to point out how absurd it is fans think they know better than guys who actually know of what they speak first hand. If they werent saying those things, you might have an argument, but alas

I can tell you exactly how much it will cost us. Nothing.

You know, on this one point, I may agree with you. After re-reading the comments from Brisson and DL, maybe I made too much of this on some level. It is still troubling why it took so long for them to make contact (and Im sorry, but when people are spending a day trying to reach each other, there are in fact unreturned phone calls not trying to overblow that, but its not like DL was juggling more this UFA season than in the past where he seemed to be pretty efficient in making contact with people and getting things done and not like there wasnt tons of time to do this before July 1). It is still troubling why when the price was so clearly set, the responses was keep waiting from DL instead of we wish you the best, adios. Just seems a clumsy way to handle it to me.

Seems apparent to me at least if he wanted him or didnt at the price that was set, either way there were better ways to handle this. I think the fact were talking about this with any disagreement is proof of that. That still has me wondering on how effective DL is at actually dealing with player contracts (not to mention his numerous bad signings that have piled up in addition to this). Im a huge fan of the guy, but this seems to be coming up as a weakness.

And Ill note you dont mention the player assets it may cost us to fill that spot Blake wont be in. That may not be much more than nothing, but it also clearly could be.

Brisson is an agent. He will always do what’s right for his commission.

Which may mean a guy like Kopitar or Johnson not re-signing here. Again, maybe I made too much of this I see in retrospect, but DL certainly didnt work in a direction where he developed a positive relationship to be given extra slack next time around. May mean nothing; may mean the difference on the next tight negotiation. Not trying to make more of that than it is, but we shall see.
Point out the complicated spins pleaseThe events appear to be, Blake wanted to go somewhere where he could get more money and compete for a cup before he’s too oldWhat’s the spin?
Man, I think its hilarious how that whole paragraph is basically just you saying you have no ability to detect irony. You start off your analysis of the situation not with facts that arent disputed and how they lead to a conclusion, but actually with your conclusion. You start with where you want to get instead of simply taking the steps and seeing where that leads you. Im not sure it will be possible to explain that to you if you dont see it to begin with.
Basically, Im looking at the quotes and events and see they tend to jive with each other. Simple example: Blake said he wants to be here and in fact was willing to stay at less than offered by other teams (specifically a team you are even saying he actually wanted to go to right?). Those two items seem to jive and really arent being disputed. I mean correct me if Im wrong there, but he is quoted as that being his intention and he was reportedly asking for $4M with a $5M offer on the table from SJ, right?
You take those same two simple facts that no one is arguing and say, no, what he really wanted was to leave. You then construct reasoning for that which ignores things that dont jive with that and conflating things that do (like the ESPN non-quote from a conference call where no other source got that item).
Its as simple as that. The spin is where you add not so obvious interpretations to things that already make sense without them in order to change their fundamental meanings. Everything that went down makes sense without something silly like adding Blake is trying to make the organization look bad. 2+2=4 without adding in motivations and deceit, yet you add those things anyway. Why? That is the spin.
And it’s not troubling for me because, as I’ve said before, Blake is too old, slow and expensive, and a poor leader.

And heres some more willful misunderstanding for the sake of distraction. Like I clearly said, Blake not re-signing is not the troubling part. The troubling part is how ineptly the whole thing seems to have gone down even by DLs direct account. And I specifically stated that was what I meant.

He’s not evil.

Yeah, hes just greedy and disloyal and a liar and motivated to make the team look bad and not much of a hockey player either. Oh, and did I mention he cant lead?

Yeah, well despite having this back and forth with you directly, not all of what I said was directly applicable to your thoughts Quisp. Youve got to be blind though if you dont see that in the comments of a significant chunk of fans that tend to broadly agree with you on this one though.

“I personally don’t have an opinion about AEG one way or another as they relate to the Kings”

Well, so much for your credibility.

Seriously?!?! Where have you been the last decade? You may want to start looking into that one if you want to have a good understanding of where this franchise is going. Like I said, I’m totally on board with DL and the direction he has gone in large, but the shadow behind him running the team is somehting to be concerned about.

You want to put all these ulterior motives to Blake, but you see nothing there in the recent moves the team has made (suprise firing of Crow, DL quoted as being nudged to go “even younger”, getting a fan backlash to ticket and parking prices after crying they were lossing money, trading Cammi who would have been looking for a big contract for a questionable return, trading Visnovsky’s big contract after just signing it and saying he was to be built around, etc.) considering the history of this ownership?

I’m not trying to start conspiracy theory thinking here, but if some red flags aren’t going up that at least make you take note of this stuff…wow. Especially considering all you’re want to read into the Blake stuff. If you think a kid who grew up on a soy bean farm in Simcoe needs to be more closely watched for shifty dishonest motives than a real estate baron like PA I think you’ve got things a bit screwy.

Just to put it in perspective, Blake is at most being motivated by a lust for millions in the single digits. That’s chump change compared to the motivations of ownership.

“In order for that to hold any weight, however, first you would have to be able to address the concerns of the “mob” on their merits.”

And I think I have done exactly that. Blake is greedy and disloyal according to the mob, but was willing to play for less money here than offered elsewhere and gave the team plenty of time to make a call on that. Just that straightforward example that isn’t in dispute I think speaks volumes on the merit of the mob’s concerns. Very straight forward and direct and I don’t even have to read between any lines or assess the character of anyone I don’t personally have any knowledge of like the mob is clearly (and proudly) doing.

Can I move on to name calling now?

Re “Come on Quisp, this is clearly willful misunderstanding by you and flat out dishonest. Gosh, I dont know, maybe less than the price the market set for him? You can not be serious with that as an argument; thats just game playing.”

Wrong and wrong. Your logic is circular. You can’t say he was willing to take less than the price the market set for him when it was BEFORE the market (i.e. the Sharks) “set” the price. Obviously, he was willing to take what he offered to DL, namely, $4MM. Clearly, the “market” had not yet been established for him at that point.

Maybe what you’re saying is that, IN RETROSPECT, Blake’s offer of $4MM to the Kings was not unreasonable given that the Sharks were willing to pay more. That’s fair enough. But it was still more than the Kings were willing to pay.

“Yeah, why argue the merits of what people say, when you can just cast them as black and white figures, one evil and one good. Brisson is one of those greedy evil agents, so instead of addressing what he says, lets just not think at all.”

I didn’t say Brisson was evil or greedy. I’m just saying “it could all have been wrapped up in ten minutes” depends on Brisson and DL essentially agreeing, which they did not.

But, “let’s just not think at all?” Dude, saying that people who don’t agree with you are thoughtless is, um, casting the world in black and white.

“If thats the case Quisp, riddle me this: why on earth would he sign here to begin with and want a no-trade clause?”

I don’t know, riddler. I guess because it was the best of his options. NTC is a thing you can get in your contract when you’re negotiating from a position of power. I don’t have a problem with any of that. Presumably, when you sign with a team, you want to play there.

p.s. “riddle me this” is condescending and asinine.

“According to you, not only does this guy have to have nefarious ulterior motives, but they have to rapidly change on the fly to fit your argument.”

My argument hasn’t changed at all. My argument is that he wanted to sign with the Sharks, and so he did. And knowing that people in LA were going to possibly have a problem with that, he said some things that were technically true while being not the whole truth.

“What quote? That was a completely unsupported assertion which was sandwiched between actual quotes from the conference call which everyone is referencing in the media without the one you are pointing to. And you arent even getting it right as to whose quote its suppose to be, right? ESPN was implying this was second had from Wilson, right?”

I think what it said was, Blake told Wilson that he wasn’t that into rebuilding anyway. That’s what you call an indirect quote. It’s not “unsupported.” The article indicates Blake said it. Presumably, Wilson said he said it. But you’d have to check with the reporter.

“This is a great example of what Im talking about with people like you…”

People like me? You’re making generalizations about people like me? In your non-black-and-white world? Again, how about a moratorium on insults?

“…stretching just as far as they can to try and manufacture an argument by assembling some bits of information that support their preconceived objective…”

Your evidence of stretching the truth is what? That I think he was being tricky when he said LA made no offer and Dean didn’t return my calls? I think that is a fair interpretation of events.

“We are rather intellectually lazy as a society.”

Projection denied.

“the loyalty neutral argument is plain BS. Thats about you wanting to hate, not about you being reasonable with the facts.”

I don’t hate Rob Blake. I don’t think he betrayed the Kings. I just don’t think you can say he’s “loyal” to the Kings. I’m not saying he should have waited two months. I’m saying people should stop saying he is or was loyal to the Kings.

And, p.s., for someone who is supposedly all about being reasonable and logical, you do seem to find it bizarrely necessary to ascribe hyperbole to others where it doesn’t exist. I don’t hate him. I don’t think he’s evil. I say Brisson is an agent, you turn that into “greedy evil agent,” etc..

“Seriously, go look at the comments; theyre littered with you taking great efforts in interpreting what was said and done…”

Actually, it’s no effort at all.

“…instead of taking things at face value (despite the fact that taking things at face value does give a simple clear explanation). Okay, youre not protesting too much at all”

I have a better idea. Why don’t you go look at the comments and come up with some specific citations of where I am “straining.”

And, by the way, taking things at face value: Rob Blake wanted to sign with the Sharks, so he did it. Why do you need to make him the victim of big bad management?

“Ive only been doing it for about twenty, but unlike you I never made the NHL or went pro. Did you ever get a chance to play for an original six team? That would have been an honor. Are you on the HoF selection committee by any chance, because I would love to hear what the thought is behind Vachon not getting proper consideration? Blah blah blah”

Listen, you were the one who offered up the absurd argument that only people who play hockey or work in hockey are qualified to decide who gets to be in the Hall of Fame. What I said was, well, I have played all my life, but that doesn’t matter. You left out the doesn’t matter part (intentionally, in order to improve your teetering argument? But of course.). The point is, I think it’s lame for you to say to people who think RB shouldn’t be in the Hall of Fame, “OH YEAH WELL REALLY SMART PEOPLE WHO ARE QUALIFIED THINK HE SHOULD AND YOU PEOPLE AREN’T QUALIFIED SO THERE!” (that’s a paraphrase of you, not an actual quote.) My counter argument is that (1) I am as qualified as the next guy, (2) I am as informed as the next guy, and (3) I outlined how I made the decision for myself (stats, comparison to others in the Hall of Fame, etc.).

“I hear people all through the hockey world (the NHL, not the local beer league in case thats not clear) talk of this guy with reverence and respect….And again, its odd how pretty much every GM would like this guy on their team (again, including ours).”

Okay. I don’t know who you’re talking about, really. I don’t hear these people. I don’t doubt that people have nice things to say about Rob Blake. I don’t know how to evaluate whether or not pretty much every GM wants to sign him. I’ll take your word for it.

“Man, I think its hilarious how that whole paragraph is basically just you saying you have no ability to detect irony.”

That would be hilarious if you made any sense.

“Basically, Im looking at the quotes and events and see they tend to jive with each other.”

You mean “jibe.”

“You take those same two simple facts that no one is arguing and say, no, what he really wanted was to leave. You then construct reasoning for that which ignores things that dont jive with that and conflating things that do.”

My evidence that he wanted to leave is (1) he left, (2) it was his choice. You seem to be saying that he didn’t WANT to leave, but the Kings MADE him leave? Or just “circumstances beyond his control” made him leave? But he really would rather have stayed? How is that a reasonable reading that jibes with the facts?

“Everything that went down makes sense without something silly like adding ‘Blake is trying to make the organization look bad’. 2+2=4 without adding in motivations and deceit, yet you add those things anyway. Why? That is the spin.”

No. Blake said, “The Kings didn’t make me an offer” but forgot to mention that his own offer was (1) non negotiable and (2) DL was having conversations with agent and player to try to make it work, having indicated that it might take him some time (read: hours). Blake also said that DL didn’t return his calls on July 1 But left out the fact that DL and Blake talked on July 1. It doesn’t sound as good to say “Dean didn’t return my calls until later in the day when we talked.”

Now, to me, that’s spin. And it ain’t a stretch.

[re AEG]“Seriously?!?! Where have you been the last decade? You may want to start looking into that one if you want to have a good understanding of where this franchise is going.”

I didn’t say AEG is my best friend. I said I don’t have a problem with them as relates to the Kings. I guess what I should have said is, I don’t have a problem with them as relates to the Blake situation. I’m sure if I thought about it, I could work myself up into a froth about how they’re handling the team, but I don’t know that it would be any worse than any of the other Kings’ owners over the years. The Kings as a team appear to be in a better position than they have since I have been following them, and I would have to include the fun but frustrating Gretzky years. I prefer the building from the ground up.

Of course, PA has religious and political leanings that I don’t agree with, and that DOES affect his presence in other industries (e.g. the movie business) but so far it doesn’t seem to be a problem for hockey. As far as I know, in my sheltered experience.

“You want to put all these ulterior motives to Blake”

I did not and do not.

“but you see nothing there in the recent moves the team has made (suprise [sic] firing of Crow…”

You think that’s AEG? I don’t know. Kind of makes sense as a GM move at this point. DL needs to get results and MC never really seemed like a good fit, etc… But okay, I’m listening. Could be AEG…

“…DL quoted as being nudged to go ‘even younger’”

You think that’s AEG, too? I got the impression DL was given the go-ahead to really go for it, whole hog, as it were. I didn’t think AEG was forcing DL go go younger against his wishes or judgment. But for the sake of argument, I’ll bite…

“trading Cammi who would have been looking for a big contract for a questionable return…”

I like Teubert. I think that’s a good deal for us. We’ll see.

“… trading Visnovsky’s big contract after just signing it and saying he was to be built around”

You think AEG was behind those trades? I like those trades. Maybe I like AEG! Fundamentally, I believe that those guys needed to go for reasons that have been discussed to death elsewhere on this site. Short version: can’t pay them and afford to keep the core together in years to come.

“I’m not trying to start conspiracy theory thinking here, but if some red flags aren’t going up that at least make you take note of this stuff…wow.”

Who says I didn’t take note of those events? Wow?

Well, I didn’t link it all together into one unified theory, that’s true. However, since I am in favor of all the moves you cited, I guess that probably explains why it’s not worrying me.

I guess I would say that those events have explanations that work at face value, so there’s no need to read into them.

As for raising ticket prices, as a season ticket holder for almost the entire 90s, I’m glad to be blissfully ignorant of it now. I don’t really believe AEG’s claim that they are losing money (as I said on another thread here), nor do I really care. They need to put a winning team on the ice.

“If you think a kid who grew up on a soy bean farm in Simcoe needs to be more closely watched for shifty dishonest motives than a real estate baron like PA I think you’ve got things a bit screwy.”

If my grandma had wheels she’d be a wagon. You’re talking nonsense. I never said Rob Blake needed to be watched for shifty motives. And I don’t trust real estate barons. So stop putting words in my mouth and then criticizing them.

Well, I can’t really say what the so-called mob thinks. I’m anti-hysteria. And I certainly don’t think Blake left because he was disloyal and greedy. Nor do I begrudge him his right to sign wherever he wants. I do think, however, that he was trying to shift the blame for the situation onto DL. You think I’m reading into it. Fair enough. And, as we’ve discussed, I don’t think his achievements rise to the standard of a Hall of Fame career. You are of course right that other people get to decide this. By the time that decision comes down, hopefully the Kings will be a dynasty.

On the other hand, my grandmother moved to Chicago in the 20s and instantly became a Cubs fan, literally listening to every game on the radio (once they started doing that) and every game on television (once they started doing that) for 78 years.

JDM –

I can’t argue with you. You speak the truth. IT’S THIS OVERWHELMING HATRED OF EVIL GREEDY BLAKE!! Er. Sorry. That just slipped out. Really, I just don’t like to be lumped in with the mob.

Yeah, I enjoy the joist, but don’t take it too seriously. Quisp, like I said in a previous comment thread, I can admittedly be asinine and condescending while entertaining myself in this fashion, so please don’t take it personally. Hopefully I also have sense to make too.

Also, I was speaking to the “mob” and what that ugly consensus has put forward, and it does seem like because I referred to you in one part of that initial post, you kind of took it as being all about you. I can’t so much apologize for you stepping in to defend the “mob” when you don’t also want to speak for them, but that’s what it is.

Similarly, I don’t like the way it reflects on me as a fan, and all kings fans, when this leads to the kind of low class stuff like having to sit through an all-star game with people booing our former captain in our building on a stage for the entire league to see. So that’s where I’m coming from. I’d be more than happy to not have to feel obligated to defend this guy.

Anyway, here’s to seeing what this team does next to ice a team this coming season.

I think we table this until he no longer plays for the fish. Until then, he is dead to me. After that, we can consider the rafters.

And this from Kat Kealy on Hockey Buzz:

No matter who the Kings choose as their new captain, two things are guaranteed. 1. He will be younger than Rob Blake (the Kings oldest player is now Derek Armstrong, born in 1973 (Blake was born at the end of 1969) and 2. Hes bound to care more about the team and where theyre going than Rob Blake did in his last year as captain. Blake barely seemed to show up and really try on the ice. Off the ice was even worse. As of a month or so into the season, Blake almost never faced the media in the locker room after games. Im sure if someone had asked to speak with him, the Kings staff would have tracked them down, but I dont think thats something anyone should have to do with the captain of a team and I know most reporters prefer not to bother the players that would rather not face the media. Odds are, theyll get better quotes from the guys who are waiting to answer questions than from someone who has been trying to avoid answering them.

A lot of people thought Blake was a bad choice from the start and I defended the choice initially. I thought it was a good choice, since hed be a good leader for the young team. I think he could have been a good leader, but it was clear pretty early that Blake wasnt going to step up and fill that position as well as he had in the past.

Hello everyone. Never part without loving words to think of during your absence. It may be that you will not meet again in life. Help me! Need information about: Online future trading firm. I found only this – future online option stock trading trading. Online future trading, chandler vowed then as grant had mushroomed. All mediators of the person are related by two co-operative optimistic rights, brought in able beliefs, online future trading. Thanks for the help , Freddy from East.