Thread: Rob Blake Retiring

Originally Posted by NastiMarvasti

I'm guessing some of you are in the process of cutting yourselves at the fact that the Kings chose to honor Blake today on their website. Remember, up the highway, not across the street.

I would hope not. Blake is a HOF defenseman and was one of the best to ever wear the Kings uniform. There isn't really any disputing that. However, that has nothing to do with how he acted before being traded from the team.

Honoring him on the website is nothing. Quite frankly, if they hadn't, it would have been classless. Blake will go in to the HOF as a King, and there is no reason he shouldn't. Putting his number on the wall though? No thanks. That's got more meaning than numbers as far as I'm concerned.

Originally Posted by NastiMarvasti

I'm guessing some of you are in the process of cutting yourselves at the fact that the Kings chose to honor Blake today on their website. Remember, up the highway, not across the street.

If people are like me they really don't give a damn. The sooner the Kings quit mentioning Blake the better.

The Kings organization, and Leiweke and Luc in particular, need to remember that their sole purpose for existing is to entertain the fans. When the fans by an over 2:1 margin dislike Blake, that should tell them it is time to move on. It will be a travesty for the entire organization if they try to retire his number. First there will be an announcement, followed by the embarassment to the organization due to the fans bombading every website and media that cares about hockey with their objections. Then after all that if they still decide to go through with it, there will be the booing the second his name is mentioned inside Staples Center.

People like you say people like me can't let it go, that's what I suggest you do, because if you were like me you would just like to forget about the guy and enjoy watching the young stars that we have today compete. I guarantee you though everytime his name comes up in association with the Kings in any way, most people will recoil and say "WTF!!"

Originally Posted by KINGS17

If people are like me they really don't give a damn. The sooner the Kings quit mentioning Blake the better.

The Kings organization, and Leiweke and Luc in particular, need to remember that their sole purpose for existing is to entertain the fans. When the fans by an over 2:1 margin dislike Blake, that should tell them it is time to move on. It will be a travesty for the entire organization if they try to retire his number. First there will be an announcement, followed by the embarassment to the organization due to the fans bombading every website and media that cares about hockey with their objections. Then after all that if they still decide to go through with it, there will be the booing the second his name is mentioned inside Staples Center.

People like you say people like me can't let it go, that's what I suggest you do, because if you were like me you would just like to forget about the guy and enjoy watching the young stars that we have today compete. I guarantee you though everytime his name comes up in association with the Kings in any way, most people will recoil and say "WTF!!"

The reason I can't let it go is because the booing and exaggeration of the whole situation makes Kings fans look bad and just plain bitter. Considering what other players have done ON the ice and almost killed others, the Blake thing is really nothing to boo about for almost a decade especially when so many people don't even have their facts straight.

Originally Posted by NastiMarvasti

The reason I can't let it go is because the booing and exaggeration of the whole situation makes Kings fans look bad and just plain bitter. Considering what other players have done ON the ice and almost killed others, the Blake thing is really nothing to boo about for almost a decade especially when so many people don't even have their facts straight.

Well, you should be happy then because Kings fans will no longer boo him. That is unless Leiweke and Luc do something incredibly stupid like trying to retire his jersey in a ceremony at Staples Center.

The fans don't owe Rob Blake a damn thing, but the Kings owe the fans everything and should respect their wishes.

This is a general question for the "Blake belongs in the HOF" people. He had 777 points. Phil Housley has 1,232 points and has been eligible since 2002 but is not on the HOF.

Explain why Blake belongs and Housley doesn't.

Originally Posted by NastiMarvasti

I'm guessing some of you are in the process of cutting yourselves at the fact that the Kings chose to honor Blake today on their website. Remember, up the highway, not across the street.

The Velvet Merkin would do this to keep Blake Jersey Unretired

Originally Posted by jt

This is a general question for the "Blake belongs in the HOF" people. He had 777 points. Phil Housley has 1,232 points and has been eligible since 2002 but is not on the HOF.

Explain why Blake belongs and Housley doesn't.

Gold medal, Stanley Cup, Norris. Different player than Housley. Langway has fewer points than Housley does too. So does Robinson.

Originally Posted by SmytheKing

Gold medal, Stanley Cup, Norris. Different player than Housley. Langway has fewer points than Housley does too. So does Robinson.

So Blake belongs in the HOF because he:

1) Played on a powerhouse Canadian hockey team while Housley played on a mediocre U.S. team (so it's not really a barometer to compare them by).
2) Was traded to a powerhouse Avalanche team that couldn't even make it to the Finals after Bourque retired in the 5 yrs Blake was there, and didn't make it out of the 2nd round 4 of the 5 yrs he was there.
3) Won a Norris, which is something several non-Hall-of Fame Dmen have won, including Doug Wilson who is another example of a Dman as good as Blake who is not in the HOF.

Also, by putting Langway and Robinson in the same sentence, are you implying that Blake is comparable to them in some way? I agree with your implication that points are not the only factor, but Langway was arguably the best defensive defenseman ever, and Robinson was arguably the greatest all-around defenseman ever. Are you implying that Blake's non-offensive abilities make him better than Housley in the same way Langway's and Robinson's made them better?

Originally Posted by jt

So Blake belongs in the HOF because he:

1) Played on a powerhouse Canadian hockey team while Housley played on a mediocre U.S. team (so it's not really a barometer to compare them by).

The fact that he was ON the "powerhouse" team says a lot in its own right. It's not like he was riding the bench during the tourney either.

Originally Posted by jt

2) Was traded to a powerhouse Avalanche team that couldn't even make it to the Finals after Bourque retired in the 5 yrs Blake was there, and didn't make it out of the 2nd round 4 of the 5 yrs he was there.

Well, Bourque never won a cup until he came to that team either. Does that make him any less of a HOF defenseman? He made it to the finals twice before he got there and couldn't do it afterall. I'd also mention that he outscored Bourque by almost 2x on that team during the playoffs and only being six points behind Sakic.

Originally Posted by jt

3) Won a Norris, which is something several non-Hall-of Fame Dmen have won, including Doug Wilson who is another example of a Dman as good as Blake who is not in the HOF.

...and Wilson didn't win a Stanley Cup and could still get in. People get passed over. Look at Ciccarelli.

Originally Posted by jt

Also, by putting Langway and Robinson in the same sentence, are you implying that Blake is comparable to them in some way? I agree with your implication that points are not the only factor, but Langway was arguably the best defensive defenseman ever, and Robinson was arguably the greatest all-around defenseman ever. Are you implying that Blake's non-offensive abilities make him better than Housley in the same way Langway's and Robinson's made them better?

Yes. I'd say Housley (while being an exceptional offensive defenseman) isn't quite as good as the total package of the other guys you mentioned. That isn't to say he shouldn't be in there either, but I'd take the career of those three over Housley if I were starting a team.