HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

David Taylor

View Poll Results: What?
Great 4 5.80%
Good 50 72.46%
Bad 12 17.39%
Terrible 3 4.35%
Voters: 69. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-07-2006, 02:58 AM
  #26
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
The whole removing the C from his jersey doesn't have anything to do with his teammates, the fans OR the front office. And yet, he did it anyways. So you don't get along with the front office. It happens. But why do that to your teammates or the fans? A lot of people demonize him for that. How many times has that ever happened? To me, it was a slap in the face, turn your back on the team and it's fans kind of a deal by doing such a thing. It's not like they slaughtered his family or anything. They tried to play hardball and it backfired.
Well, the first slap in the face came from management; don't forget that. Also, I'm sure that the way that it was taken by the fans wasn't the way that he meant it to be taken. His taking the C back after he saw the reaction bears that out. He reacted impulsively to the slap in his face in one of the few ways that he could, obviously without thinking it through enough. Can you really blame him or hold a poor, impulse decision (that he, later, rescinded) against him for even 5 days, much less 5 years?

Osprey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 03:03 AM
  #27
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
When a player makes it clear that he wants to leave an organization, the fans will more often then not consider that player to be a traitor. It's the natural reaction.
This is part of the myth regarding the situation. I challenge you to find proof that Blake wanted to leave the organization. On the contrary, I think that you'll find that, while he had eventually resigned himself to the idea that he'd be traded, he was always hopeful that things would work out with the Kings, even up to the day that he was traded.

Osprey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 03:09 AM
  #28
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,858
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
Well, the first slap in the face came from management; don't forget that. Also, I'm sure that the way that it was taken by the fans wasn't the way that he meant it to be taken. His taking the C back after he saw the reaction bears that out. He reacted impulsively to the slap in his face in one of the few ways that he could, obviously without thinking it through enough. Can you really blame him or hold a poor, impulse decision (that he, later, rescinded) against him for even 5 days, much less 5 years?
A lowball offer isn't really a slap in the face. At least not to me. It's a business decision, however poor a decision it may be, it's not personal. If it's taken personally, then I suggest the player grow some thicker skin. It's not like it was an ugly arbitration case....

But it's not really an impulse decision either. An impulse decision would have been to storm out of the room after the offer. Or to get on the phone right then and there and tell his wife he would be traded.

Going home, and then going to practice and then telling the staff, and your teammates that you didn't want to be captain anymore, or whatever he did is not an impulse decision. Unless of course he had a meeting with DT just before a game or practice and he removed the C directly afterwards.

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 03:29 AM
  #29
johnjm22
16,005
 
johnjm22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Barstow, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 8,566
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
This is part of the myth regarding the situation. I challenge you to find proof that Blake wanted to leave the organization. On the contrary, I think that you'll find that, while he had eventually resigned himself to the idea that he'd be traded, he was always hopeful that things would work out with the Kings, even up to the day that he was traded.
Well, I don't have time to search in depth, but I found this after searching for about a minute.

Quote:
The Kings first offered Blake a five-year, $40 million deal, then upped that bid last week, but Blake turned them down.

"It was evident to us from very early on Rob was intent on free agency," Kings general manager Dave Taylor said. "Last week, we added to our proposals in an attempt to bridge the gap, but we were unsuccessful."
http://espn.go.com/nhl/news/2001/0221/1101148.html

As fan, It's hard to not see a player as traitor when he turns down a deal like that. If he really wanted to stay a King would have excepted the 8M+ he was offered.

johnjm22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 03:52 AM
  #30
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,472
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
When Taylor took over as GM the Kings were not in the playoffs. When he left as a GM the Kings were not in the playoffs. That's a bad GM in my book. Whether or not his hands were tied is opinion, missing the playoffs is a fact. You'll get to see this suppoosed pipeline work this season since the Kings have 1 of the weakest group of forwards ever assembled right now. DT was 7 years of moving sideways.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 07:45 AM
  #31
Captain Ron
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Gardnerville, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 17,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkanen View Post
When Taylor took over as GM the Kings were not in the playoffs. When he left as a GM the Kings were not in the playoffs. That's a bad GM in my book. Whether or not his hands were tied is opinion, missing the playoffs is a fact. You'll get to see this suppoosed pipeline work this season since the Kings have 1 of the weakest group of forwards ever assembled right now. DT was 7 years of moving sideways.
I agree with your assessment Tikk.

Captain Ron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 12:19 PM
  #32
PSP
Couldn't Be Happier!
 
PSP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
You're sadly mistaken if you think the Kings' farm system isn't respectable.

The Kings' have quite a few good young players, both in their system and in the NHL. If every team in the league had to put together a team using U25 players how do think the Kings would rank?

Alex Frolov (24) - Anze Kopitar (18) - Michael Cammalleri (24)
Patrick O'Sullivan (21) - Brian Boyle (21) - Dustin Brown (21)
Konstantin Pushkarev (21) - Trevor Lewis (19) - Lauri Tukonen (19)
Scott Parse (21) - Bud Holloway (18) - Petr Kanko (22)
Marty Guerin (23), Greg Hogeboom (23), Gabe Gauthier (22)

Richard Petiot (23) - Tim Gleason (23)
TJ Fast (18) - Joey Ryan (19)
Peter Harrold (23) - Ryan McGinnis (19)
Niclas Andersen (18), Patrik Hersley (20), Paul Baier (21)

Jonathan Bernier (17)
Jon Quick (20)
Jeff Zatkoff (19)
Ryan Munce (21)
Matt Zaba (22)

That's pretty solid. Not too many teams could match that.

The reason were ranked 24th is probably because some of our young guys have recently graduated, and our no longer in the system. (See: Brown, Cammy, Gleason)
Your list has 4 players with NHL experience, 2 with a "cup of joe" in the show, and a whole bunch of "maybes". That's nice, but IMO those results could have been matched with anyone using any of the prospect rating publications instead of the army of scouts the Kings have employed.

Quote:
If you think this organization's farm system was better in 1997 you're blind
If you set the bar low enough, you will always succeed

PSP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 12:25 PM
  #33
kingsfan25
Registered User
 
kingsfan25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,834
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
A lowball offer isn't really a slap in the face. At least not to me. It's a business decision, however poor a decision it may be, it's not personal. If it's taken personally, then I suggest the player grow some thicker skin. It's not like it was an ugly arbitration case...

Yes it is. Maybe you can get away with that from some sniper that you picked up at the deadline the year before. But when you go to your franchise player, your captain...pretty much your only homegrown success before the season has even started and give him a an offer that's well below what he's worth and say: "Take it or leave it...no negotiations," you're sending a message...and not a good one.

kingsfan25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 12:34 PM
  #34
PSP
Couldn't Be Happier!
 
PSP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnjm22 View Post
http://espn.go.com/nhl/news/2001/0221/1101148.html

As fan, It's hard to not see a player as traitor when he turns down a deal like that. If he really wanted to stay a King would have excepted the 8M+ he was offered.
You are missing a few details.

The Kings started off much closer to $6.5mil with Blake asking for $8mil. The Kings tried to play hardball with the "take it or leave it" stance, but that blew up in their faces when Pronger got the $10mil contract. It took the Kings almost 5 months for their offer to get up to $8mil - by that time, the damage had been done.

I don't know if this was DT's fault or Gilmore or Leiweke, but it wasn't good business. Had they upped their offer to $7.5mil or so before Pronger signed, in all likelihood Blake would have signed a long term contract.

PSP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 12:53 PM
  #35
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,472
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
And don't forget Taylor & Co. told the fans wait til the salary cap era starts then we will be players. 1st year=missed playoffs. 2nd year=team looks worse than 1st year.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 12:57 PM
  #36
guzmania
Registered User
 
guzmania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: SCV
Country: United States
Posts: 2,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSP View Post
...Your list has 4 players with NHL experience, 2 with a "cup of joe" in the show, and a whole bunch of "maybes". ...
Guess that's my definition of a "pipeline".

And by the way, the missing of the playoffs just before DT took over and as he left are completely different. Does the term "1500 man-games lost" over 4 years have no meaning for you? They just weren't the role players either. They were the guns. If you want to cry in your beer do it for the right reason, bad luck not sabotage or stupidity.

guzmania is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 01:02 PM
  #37
Capn Brown
Registered User
 
Capn Brown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,493
vCash: 500
If Tambellini turns out to be crud, then DT was an amazing GM!

Capn Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 01:03 PM
  #38
Puck U
2012 SC CHAMPIONS !
 
Puck U's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Apple Valley, CA.
Country: United States
Posts: 8,340
vCash: 500
I find it funny how everyone that wants to say the $8 mil a year offer to Blake the heart and soul and team captain, etc. was a low ball offer slap in the face bad business stupid move ... seem to be the same ones that complained that a $4.25 mil offer to Norstrom the heart and soul and team captain, etc. was an overpayment, bad business stupid move, etc ... make up your minds, or maybe you all just like to complain for the sake of complaining. yeah I think that's more it

Puck U is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 01:12 PM
  #39
PSP
Couldn't Be Happier!
 
PSP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puck U View Post
I find it funny how everyone that wants to say the $8 mil a year offer to Blake the heart and soul and team captain, etc. was a low ball offer slap in the face bad business stupid move ... seem to be the same ones that complained that a $4.25 mil offer to Norstrom the heart and soul and team captain, etc. was an overpayment, bad business stupid move, etc ... make up your minds, or maybe you all just like to complain for the sake of complaining. yeah I think that's more it
The $8mil offer in January wasn't the lowball offer - it was the "take it or leave it" $6 - $6.5mil offer in September.

PSP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 03:58 PM
  #40
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
A lowball offer isn't really a slap in the face. At least not to me. It's a business decision, however poor a decision it may be, it's not personal.
Then why are you so sure that it wasn't a "business decision" for Blake to turn it down, take off the C to increase bargaining strength and wait for something closer to his true worth? It was nothing personal against the fans, yet so many of you take it that way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper
If it's taken personally, then I suggest the player grow some thicker skin.
That is exactly the advice that I give to fans who took Blake's decisions personally. I couldn't have said it better myself. If only the fans would take their own advice for once.


Last edited by Osprey: 08-07-2006 at 04:24 PM.
Osprey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 04:16 PM
  #41
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puck U View Post
I find it funny how everyone that wants to say the $8 mil a year offer to Blake the heart and soul and team captain, etc. was a low ball offer slap in the face bad business stupid move ... seem to be the same ones that complained that a $4.25 mil offer to Norstrom the heart and soul and team captain, etc. was an overpayment, bad business stupid move, etc ... make up your minds, or maybe you all just like to complain for the sake of complaining. yeah I think that's more it
Why, exactly, do you find that funny? Offering too little and offering too much are both questionable business practices. Is that not rather easy to comprehend?

Osprey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 04:27 PM
  #42
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,858
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
Then why are you so sure that it wasn't a "business decision" for Blake to turn it down, take off the C to increase bargaining strength and wait for something closer to his true worth? It was nothing personal against the fans, yet so many of you take it that way.That is exactly the advice that I give to you and other fans who took Blake's decisions personally. I couldn't have said it better myself. If only the fans would take their own advice for once.
So taking off the c was a business decision? I fail to see how. By not being captain he thought he'd get more money? Aren't most captains paid more for their leadership qualities? Removing the C hurt him more than anything else.

In his initial stage it may not have been personal as you said. But how did he expect the fans to take it? Or his teammates? The Kings are running a business. Blake was one of their employees. Are the fans one of Blakes employees? I think not. Him taking off the c was not a business decison. The fans grow fond of their teams players, especially their captain. Do you think fans in Detroit would've been pleased had Yzerman removed the c off his jersey during some rocky negotiations with Detroit management?


Last edited by Reaper45: 08-07-2006 at 04:32 PM.
Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 05:03 PM
  #43
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,472
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
Quote:
Originally Posted by guzmania View Post
Guess that's my definition of a "pipeline".

And by the way, the missing of the playoffs just before DT took over and as he left are completely different. Does the term "1500 man-games lost" over 4 years have no meaning for you? They just weren't the role players either. They were the guns. If you want to cry in your beer do it for the right reason, bad luck not sabotage or stupidity.

DT made trades for players with a history of injuries including Miller, Deadmarsh, Allison and Palffy. He traded youth for a guy with an injured knee in Brent Sopel. He then refused to fire a coach who demanded star players grind the corners where they take a beating. Bad luck? Does luck even exist? The facts are that DT led the team nowhere, the team is in shambles, there are no saviors coming, therefore he was a bad GM.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 05:03 PM
  #44
Osprey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 14,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
So taking off the c was a business decision?
It's a possibility. His agent may have suggested to him that, if the Kings weren't going to pay him like a captain, then he wouldn't be the captain, and, hopefully, the Kings would panic and up their offer. I find that a very plausible possibility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
In his initial stage it may not have been personal as you said. But how did he expect the fans to take it?
How did the Kings expect Blake to take it when they lowballed him and said "take it or leave it"? You're chastising Blake for not thinking of how the fans would react, yet you don't hold management accountable for not thinking of how Blake would react.

Don't you see that this is a domino effect? Management makes a callous decision (lowball, "take-it-or-leave-it") without thinking of how it'd be perceived -> Blake takes it the way most people would take it and reacts personally by making a callous decision (to remove the C) -> fans take it the way most people would take it and react personally by making a callous decision (to hate and boo him).

Osprey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 05:06 PM
  #45
The Tikkanen
Pest
 
The Tikkanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Yorba Linda
Country: United States
Posts: 6,472
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to The Tikkanen
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper45 View Post
Do you think fans in Detroit would've been pleased had Yzerman removed the c off his jersey during some rocky negotiations with Detroit management?
Were there ever any rocky negotiations in Detroit with Yzerman? DT & Co used the take it or leave it method which is horrible business.

The Tikkanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 05:29 PM
  #46
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,858
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osprey View Post
It's a possibility. His agent may have suggested to him that, if the Kings weren't going to pay him like a captain, then he wouldn't be the captain, and, hopefully, the Kings would panic and up their offer. I find that a very plausible possibility.How did the Kings expect Blake to take it when they lowballed him and said "take it or leave it"? You're chastising Blake for not thinking of how the fans would react, yet you don't hold management accountable for not thinking of how Blake would react.

Don't you see that this is a domino effect? Management makes a callous decision (lowball, "take-it-or-leave-it") without thinking of how it'd be perceived -> Blake takes it the way most people would take it and reacts personally by making a callous decision (to remove the C) -> fans take it the way most people would take it and react personally by making a callous decision (to hate and boo him).
Don't put words into my mouth. I've never said that management was all sunshine and gummy bears. They ****ed up and alienated Blake. But did Blake have to go and alienate the fans? That's what I don't get.

It's like you offer me 6 bucks an hour to babysit your kids, take it or leave it. I want 8 bucks an hour and you wont give it to me, so instead of just saying it's been real to your kids and saying goodbye, I then go and punch your kids in the stomach and say "Take that Osprey."

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 05:31 PM
  #47
Reaper45
Registered User
 
Reaper45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: South Bay
Country: United States
Posts: 30,858
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Reaper45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkanen View Post
Were there ever any rocky negotiations in Detroit with Yzerman? DT & Co used the take it or leave it method which is horrible business.
Of course not. It's the principle. Blake at the time was what Yzerman was to Detroit. A guy who had been with the team his entire career, captain, fans adored him, the whole nine yards.

Do you think regardless of how negotiations would go, that Yzerman would turn his back on the fans like that? I can't be the captain of this tem because they didn't offer me enough money. Sorry little Jimmy, I'm not captain of this team anymore because I'm not getting the $$$$ I expect. I sure as hell don't.

Reaper45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 06:05 PM
  #48
guzmania
Registered User
 
guzmania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: SCV
Country: United States
Posts: 2,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tikkanen View Post
DT made trades for players with a history of injuries including Miller, Deadmarsh, Allison and Palffy. He traded youth for a guy with an injured knee in Brent Sopel. He then refused to fire a coach who demanded star players grind the corners where they take a beating. Bad luck? Does luck even exist? The facts are that DT led the team nowhere, the team is in shambles, there are no saviors coming, therefore he was a bad GM.
Well if we're just gonna make crap up...what exactly would the point of that be...so the only good players are players who've have never been hurt...every team has hundreds and hundreds of man-games missed each year, ya just have to be prepared for that...the coach hated you personally and tanked the team...you must be a pip...just outta curiosity why'd you choose the Kings?.. I'm sure there's a Dodger board somewhere...just our bad luck I guess...

guzmania is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 07:43 PM
  #49
wupmasta2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 33
vCash: 500
I rate DT "good."

Someone quoted Larry Robinson as saying, "You can't make chicken soup out of chicken ****," when asked about his tenure as a Kings coach. I believe DT would be justified in making the same comment regarding his tenure as a Kings GM.

Why? Two reasons: The Blake trade and the Schnieder trade.

Blake left b/c Uncle Phil wouldn't pay him. I have no doubt that DT was willing to give Blake the contract he sought.

Schneider was trade b/c the Kings "could not afford" to keep both Miller and Schneider. Are you kidding me???

Moves I didn't like: Letting mini-me Blake go and the gawd-awful Tambellini/Grebeshkov deal. The deadline moves, in my opinion, were more of a result of Uncle Phils cheapness rather than DT's incompitence. Heck, even this year DT had to "ask" for more money to operate near the cap.

I HIGHLY doubt things are going to be much better for Dean Lombardi. But, maybe he can make the chicken **** taste a little less bitter.

wupmasta2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2006, 07:47 PM
  #50
kingsfan25
Registered User
 
kingsfan25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,834
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wupmasta2000 View Post
I rate DT "good."

Someone quoted Larry Robinson as saying, "You can't make chicken soup out of chicken ****," when asked about his tenure as a Kings coach. I believe DT would be justified in making the same comment regarding his tenure as a Kings GM.

Why? Two reasons: The Blake trade and the Schnieder trade.

Blake left b/c Uncle Phil wouldn't pay him. I have no doubt that DT was willing to give Blake the contract he sought.

Schneider was trade b/c the Kings "could not afford" to keep both Miller and Schneider. Are you kidding me???

Moves I didn't like: Letting mini-me Blake go and the gawd-awful Tambellini/Grebeshkov deal. The deadline moves, in my opinion, were more of a result of Uncle Phils cheapness rather than DT's incompitence. Heck, even this year DT had to "ask" for more money to operate near the cap.

I HIGHLY doubt things are going to be much better for Dean Lombardi. But, maybe he can make the chicken **** taste a little less bitter.

To be fair, the restrictions AEG can place on DL are significantly less than those that were placed on DT for the balance of his tenure.

kingsfan25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:18 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.