If the Blues do well in Playoffs, who looks Worse Army or ASOGG?

[a smell of green grass]

If Blues do well in playoffs, who looks worse, Army or yours truly (ASOGG)?

Army wanted to trade away the Blues Captain at the trade deadline, and would have done so if Schenn had agreed to it. Seiously, what GM would trade away their Captain if they thought a CUP was even remotely possible?

If we do well in the Playoffs, will you all agree with me that Army has to go because of poor talent evaluation? You are stuck with me forever unfortunately.

Go Blues.

So if Army puts together a team capable of making a deep cup run when we were all expecting a few rebuilding years that to you is evidence of a lack of talent evaluation? Because he considered trading one player away it undoes the fact that he put the rest of the roster together? Seriously that's your point?

Insanity isn't it? The implication that if the Blues do well in the playoffs, Army may look worse ... ???

What is worse?
a) A GM that believes and publicly says that the team is great, and they flop.
b) A GM that believes and publicly says the team is a flop, and they do great.

I'll take A all day, every day. A GM that doesn't even know how good the talent is that he is sitting on is worthless.

Do you even understand what you wrote here?

Perfectly.

I don't want a GM that is clueless about the real level of talent on the team.
The very worst situation is having a GM that dismantles a winning team because he is clueless.

Can you name an example of a coach in NHL history that said at the trade deadline...

"Things aren't changing, so we have to get rid of the guys who have been here the longest...." And then the GM tries to trade the Captain despite a NTC... And then they go on to win the CUP? If the Blues win the CUP, it would be the biggest FU from the players to the GM in NHL history.

At the moment, the BLUES are winning, but the GM is losing face. That is a very bad long-term situation.

If GM A has a bad team & thinks it's good & GM B has a good team but thinks it's bad & dismantles the team to where it's bad what exactly is the difference? At the end you have a bad team either way. If it makes you feel better about your GM having positive vibes on his way yo building a bad team OK, but you still have a bad team.

At the end of the day if the Blues do well literally no one but you will say "but he wanted to trade away his captain". They'll just look at all the additions he made as positives that helped create a good team. You're the only person (possibly in the world) who thinks Army is "losing face" as his team is surging.

I believe that you are way underestimating the egg on Army's face.

If the Blues win, it will be the biggest story line in the NHL. Don't be surprised if the Blues players themselves call attention to it.

[Mr Nice Guy]

If Blues do well in playoffs, who looks worse, Army or yours truly (ASOGG)?

Army wanted to trade away the Blues Captain at the trade deadline, and would have done so if Schenn had agreed to it. Seiously, what GM would trade away their Captain if they thought a CUP was even remotely possible?

If we do well in the Playoffs, will you all agree with me that Army has to go because of poor talent evaluation? You are stuck with me forever unfortunately.

Go Blues.

So if Army puts together a team capable of making a deep cup run when we were all expecting a few rebuilding years that to you is evidence of a lack of talent evaluation? Because he considered trading one player away it undoes the fact that he put the rest of the roster together? Seriously that's your point?

Insanity isn't it? The implication that if the Blues do well in the playoffs, Army may look worse ... ???

What is worse?
a) A GM that believes and publicly says that the team is great, and they flop.
b) A GM that believes and publicly says the team is a flop, and they do great.

I'll take A all day, every day. A GM that doesn't even know how good the talent is that he is sitting on is worthless.

Do you even understand what you wrote here?

Perfectly.

I don't want a GM that is clueless about the real level of talent on the team.
The very worst situation is having a GM that dismantles a winning team because he is clueless.

Can you name an example of a coach in NHL history that said at the trade deadline...

"Things aren't changing, so we have to get rid of the guys who have been here the longest...." And then the GM tries to trade the Captain despite a NTC... And then they go on to win the CUP? If the Blues win the CUP, it would be the biggest FU from the players to the GM in NHL history.

At the moment, the BLUES are winning, but the GM is losing face. That is a very bad long-term situation.

If GM A has a bad team & thinks it's good & GM B has a good team but thinks it's bad & dismantles the team to where it's bad what exactly is the difference? At the end you have a bad team either way. If it makes you feel better about your GM having positive vibes on his way yo building a bad team OK, but you still have a bad team.

At the end of the day if the Blues do well literally no one but you will say "but he wanted to trade away his captain". They'll just look at all the additions he made as positives that helped create a good team. You're the only person (possibly in the world) who thinks Army is "losing face" as his team is surging.

I believe that you are way underestimating the egg on Army's face.

If the Blues win, it will be the biggest story line in the NHL. Don't be surprised if the Blues players themselves call attention to it.

You're either trolling or too stupid to have an intelligent conversation with. I'll let you decide which it is.

[Barksdale's People]

So this is the CYA thread huh? Imagine being this guy with this posting history and having to start a thread acknowledging they just might win the whole f’n thing.

Priceless.

[a smell of green grass]

You're either trolling or too stupid to have an intelligent conversation with. I'll let you decide which it is.

"Mr Nice Guy"

[a smell of green grass]

So this is the CYA thread huh? Imagine being this guy with this posting history and having to start a thread acknowledging they just might win the whole f’n thing.

Priceless.

I've already reiterated my predictions.

The Blues will not win more than 1 game in the playoffs.

I hope that they win it all, but I don't think that they will do well at all.

The purpose of this thread is to provide facts. Army said publicly that the Blues weren't very good as well. What I want to know is what happens to Army IF the Blues do well. With every game that the Blues win, Army's talent evaluation looks worse.

[sdaltons]

If Blues do well in playoffs, who looks worse, Army or yours truly (ASOGG)?

Army wanted to trade away the Blues Captain at the trade deadline, and would have done so if Schenn had agreed to it. Seiously, what GM would trade away their Captain if they thought a CUP was even remotely possible?

If we do well in the Playoffs, will you all agree with me that Army has to go because of poor talent evaluation? You are stuck with me forever unfortunately.

Go Blues.

So if Army puts together a team capable of making a deep cup run when we were all expecting a few rebuilding years that to you is evidence of a lack of talent evaluation? Because he considered trading one player away it undoes the fact that he put the rest of the roster together? Seriously that's your point?

Insanity isn't it? The implication that if the Blues do well in the playoffs, Army may look worse ... ???

What is worse?
a) A GM that believes and publicly says that the team is great, and they flop.
b) A GM that believes and publicly says the team is a flop, and they do great.

I'll take A all day, every day. A GM that doesn't even know how good the talent is that he is sitting on is worthless.

Do you even understand what you wrote here?

Perfectly.

I don't want a GM that is clueless about the real level of talent on the team.
The very worst situation is having a GM that dismantles a winning team because he is clueless.

Can you name an example of a coach in NHL history that said at the trade deadline...

"Things aren't changing, so we have to get rid of the guys who have been here the longest...." And then the GM tries to trade the Captain despite a NTC... And then they go on to win the CUP? If the Blues win the CUP, it would be the biggest FU from the players to the GM in NHL history.

At the moment, the BLUES are winning, but the GM is losing face. That is a very bad long-term situation.

Ok then you didn't understand what you wrote. Thanks for clearing that up.

[Barksdale's People]

So this is the CYA thread huh? Imagine being this guy with this posting history and having to start a thread acknowledging they just might win the whole f’n thing.

Priceless.

I've already reiterated my predictions.

The Blues will not win more than 1 game in the playoffs.

I hope that they win it all, but I don't think that they will do well at all.

The purpose of this thread is to provide facts. Army said publicly that the Blues weren't very good as well. What I want to know is what happens to Army IF the Blues do well. With every game that the Blues win, Army's talent evaluation looks worse.

The purpose of this thread is to show off your misconceptions. And I thank you for sharing those with the rest of us to revel in at your expense.

[roadkillIL]

GG writes... "with every game the Blues win, Army''s talent evaluation looks worse". Speechless!

[dhsux]

If Blues do well in playoffs, who looks worse, Army or yours truly (ASOGG)?

Army wanted to trade away the Blues Captain at the trade deadline, and would have done so if Schenn had agreed to it. Seiously, what GM would trade away their Captain if they thought a CUP was even remotely possible?

If we do well in the Playoffs, will you all agree with me that Army has to go because of poor talent evaluation? You are stuck with me forever unfortunately.

Go Blues.

So if Army puts together a team capable of making a deep cup run when we were all expecting a few rebuilding years that to you is evidence of a lack of talent evaluation? Because he considered trading one player away it undoes the fact that he put the rest of the roster together? Seriously that's your point?

Insanity isn't it? The implication that if the Blues do well in the playoffs, Army may look worse ... ???

What is worse?
a) A GM that believes and publicly says that the team is great, and they flop.
b) A GM that believes and publicly says the team is a flop, and they do great.

I'll take A all day, every day. A GM that doesn't even know how good the talent is that he is sitting on is worthless.

Do you even understand what you wrote here?

It's bizarro world sheeet.

There is no logic...just babbling and basic hate.

Blues could win the Cup this year and this clown would have 5 things to b11tch about DA on false claims.

[Bubble4427]

Nobody will be more positive than me if the facts point that way.

That said, I have been harsh regarding the team, and if they do well in the playoffs, I will leave you all to your good senses and sanity. I promise to leave BluesTalk forever, and just watch the games and shut up. I'm just a drag on this place if that's the case.

I have to recommend, however, that you demand the same from Army. If our GM can't see how good the team really is, and since he was ready to give up on them at the trade deadline, then his talent evaluation skills are not nearly sufficient.

My dream scenario...
The Blues do well, and Army leaves town, and I leave BluesTalk.

Dude, you’re so obsessed with Army you are making up your own history.
The Blues before the 4 nations tourney looked awful and were definitely going to be sellers. Army, doing his due diligence, asked Schenn if he wanted an opportunity to play elsewhere……Schenn said no except if it were an opportunity to play with his brother.
The 4 nations tourney ended…the Blues caught fire immediately and ARMY a made the decision to stand pat and not make a deal. He stated that the only deal he was going to make right before the deadline was if were a hockey trade only….not for futures.

Just stop with your ignorance. Your act has gotten tired and old and just reeks of desperation.
Unless the Blues win the cup……you will condemn this season and blame it on Army. Spend your life trying to be more productive……AND HONEST.

[zuck698]

The O.P. has to be celebrating April Fools right? No way he or she can be serious with this!

[BudOnTap]

So this is the CYA thread huh? Imagine being this guy with this posting history and having to start a thread acknowledging they just might win the whole f’n thing.

Priceless.

I've already reiterated my predictions.

The Blues will not win more than 1 game in the playoffs.

I hope that they win it all, but I don't think that they will do well at all.

The purpose of this thread is to provide facts. Army said publicly that the Blues weren't very good as well. What I want to know is what happens to Army IF the Blues do well. With every game that the Blues win, Army's talent evaluation looks worse.

The answer is nothing happens to him if the Blues do well. Or if they don’t. Now that that is settled, you can devote your one working brain cell to other matters and stop dwelling on it.

[imyourhuckleberry]

If Blues do well in playoffs, who looks worse, Army or yours truly (ASOGG)?

Army wanted to trade away the Blues Captain at the trade deadline, and would have done so if Schenn had agreed to it. Seiously, what GM would trade away their Captain if they thought a CUP was even remotely possible?

If we do well in the Playoffs, will you all agree with me that Army has to go because of poor talent evaluation? You are stuck with me forever unfortunately.

Go Blues.

So if Army puts together a team capable of making a deep cup run when we were all expecting a few rebuilding years that to you is evidence of a lack of talent evaluation? Because he considered trading one player away it undoes the fact that he put the rest of the roster together? Seriously that's your point?

Insanity isn't it? The implication that if the Blues do well in the playoffs, Army may look worse ... ???

What is worse?
a) A GM that believes and publicly says that the team is great, and they flop.
b) A GM that believes and publicly says the team is a flop, and they do great.

I'll take A all day, every day. A GM that doesn't even know how good the talent is that he is sitting on is worthless.

Do you even understand what you wrote here?

Perfectly.

I don't want a GM that is clueless about the real level of talent on the team.
The very worst situation is having a GM that dismantles a winning team because he is clueless.

Can you name an example of a coach in NHL history that said at the trade deadline...

"Things aren't changing, so we have to get rid of the guys who have been here the longest...." And then the GM tries to trade the Captain despite a NTC... And then they go on to win the CUP? If the Blues win the CUP, it would be the biggest FU from the players to the GM in NHL history.

At the moment, the BLUES are winning, but the GM is losing face. That is a very bad long-term situation.

If GM A has a bad team & thinks it's good & GM B has a good team but thinks it's bad & dismantles the team to where it's bad what exactly is the difference? At the end you have a bad team either way. If it makes you feel better about your GM having positive vibes on his way yo building a bad team OK, but you still have a bad team.

At the end of the day if the Blues do well literally no one but you will say "but he wanted to trade away his captain". They'll just look at all the additions he made as positives that helped create a good team. You're the only person (possibly in the world) who thinks Army is "losing face" as his team is surging.

I believe that you are way underestimating the egg on Army's face.

If the Blues win, it will be the biggest story line in the NHL. Don't be surprised if the Blues players themselves call attention to it.

You're either trolling or too stupid to have an intelligent conversation with. I'll let you decide which it is.

A little from column A.
A lot from column B.

[Wattage]

Not one person has acknowledged that "Army did give up on the team in 2025" based on his attempting to trade Captain Schenn. That's OK. I'll keep pounding home the facts. I'm confident that there are some who find the truth refreshing.

The next questions are....
1. So how uncomfortable is Army getting with each WIN? He is looking worse and worse with each WIN.

2. Is the team happy to make Army look like a fool?

First if all. Captain is an overrated title and game. All vets have leadership roles but whoever has title of captain doesmt really change that much as all. If parayko had title captain it wpuldnt change the efevtiveness of this team any more than schenn holding it.

Secondly, everyone gave up on this team.

Lastly, schenn was garbage for quite some time. He is playing well nkw but he was a detriment to the team last season and early this season. He was so bad last year many considered him untradable. If the blues fell to bottom of standings, youd be moaning that we didnt trade vets for value at deadline. You are such a P[ositively] O[bnoxious] S[impleton] and dishonest. No matter what action happens ypu will always say army is wrong no matter what he does. How didnhe acquire the talent? He breilliantly maneuvered for broberg and holloway. He made a sta of a trade for fowler, a guy many were dpubting would make a difference.

[neverchange27]

Armstrong has nothing to do with the Blues ripping off 10 wins. The farther he stays away from the team and isolates himself, the better.

[a smell of green grass]

Not one person has acknowledged that "Army did give up on the team in 2025" based on his attempting to trade Captain Schenn. That's OK. I'll keep pounding home the facts. I'm confident that there are some who find the truth refreshing.

The next questions are....
1. So how uncomfortable is Army getting with each WIN? He is looking worse and worse with each WIN.

2. Is the team happy to make Army look like a fool?

First if all. Captain is an overrated title and game. All vets have leadership roles but whoever has title of captain doesmt really change that much as all. If parayko had title captain it wpuldnt change the efevtiveness of this team any more than schenn holding it.

Secondly, everyone gave up on this team.

Lastly, schenn was garbage for quite some time. He is playing well nkw but he was a detriment to the team last season and early this season. He was so bad last year many considered him untradable. If the blues fell to bottom of standings, youd be moaning that we didnt trade vets for value at deadline. You are such a P[ositively] O[bnoxious] S[impleton] and dishonest. No matter what action happens ypu will always say army is wrong no matter what he does. How didnhe acquire the talent? He breilliantly maneuvered for broberg and holloway. He made a sta of a trade for fowler, a guy many were dpubting would make a difference.

So let me fully state your arguments:

Army made Schenn Captain, and Schenn is $%#$%, possibly still un-trade-able.
Army gave up on the Blues, but so did everyone else, so that means Army is doing fine as GM.
Army took a chance on a 1000-game veteran defenseman. Clearly, Army has a real eye for spotting talent that no one else saw in the 1000 games.
Army stole Broberg and Holloway and immediately they are our best prospects. It's wonderful and amazing that guys on Edmonton's bench were noticeably better than the guys on our bench.

I wouldn't recommend that you ever be Army's agent. You're not too good at it.