The Hockey Guys Blues 2025-26 Season Preview

[TBone]

Disclaimer: The video above is hosted on Youtube, and has not be reviewed by the staff of the Post-Dispatch.

[DawgDad]

Good overview, honest assessment.

[moose-and-squirrel]

he's hard to watch

[dhsux]

Love the guy and his presentation.

Seemed a bit skeptical on the Bolduc/Mailloux trade but that should be expected from most outside observers......let's face it that trade is all about whether the Blues have read the tea leaves correctly on JM.....or not.

3rd or 4th central and ending on a good run would be fantastic.

[seattleblue]

Big Shannon fan here, he's just a straightforward guy who loves hockey and due to watching every game has acquired a rare perspective. We get a lot of complaints here that Blues fans are tunnel vision with their own team and there's a ton of merit to that. When you see all the games like he does your entire goal is to call it like you see it for all teams and he does. It's a real honest effort, I appreciate his passion and I appreciate that he figure out how to monetize his straightforward edge.

I lost track of the thread where we were saying which dark horse to make the team out of camp, Dvorsky is 50/50 but I wouldn't call him a dark horse. The dark horse is Kaskimaki IMO. We never talk about him much and he had a nice development year and from Armstrong's comments he is a big Kaskimaki fan.

[DawgDad]

Big Shannon fan here, he's just a straightforward guy who loves hockey and due to watching every game has acquired a rare perspective. We get a lot of complaints here that Blues fans are tunnel vision with their own team and there's a ton of merit to that. When you see all the games like he does your entire goal is to call it like you see it for all teams and he does. It's a real honest effort, I appreciate his passion and I appreciate that he figure out how to monetize his straightforward edge.

I lost track of the thread where we were saying which dark horse to make the team out of camp, Dvorsky is 50/50 but I wouldn't call him a dark horse. The dark horse is Kaskimaki IMO. We never talk about him much and he had a nice development year and from Armstrong's comments he is a big Kaskimaki fan.

I think everyone in his bottom 5% (prediction) group is a regular on this forum.

[seattleblue]

Big Shannon fan here, he's just a straightforward guy who loves hockey and due to watching every game has acquired a rare perspective. We get a lot of complaints here that Blues fans are tunnel vision with their own team and there's a ton of merit to that. When you see all the games like he does your entire goal is to call it like you see it for all teams and he does. It's a real honest effort, I appreciate his passion and I appreciate that he figure out how to monetize his straightforward edge.

I lost track of the thread where we were saying which dark horse to make the team out of camp, Dvorsky is 50/50 but I wouldn't call him a dark horse. The dark horse is Kaskimaki IMO. We never talk about him much and he had a nice development year and from Armstrong's comments he is a big Kaskimaki fan.

I think everyone in his bottom 5% (prediction) group is a regular on this forum.

I was a little rude to you the other day, I want to apologize.

Your comment got me thinking, I know yours was a toss-off comment not intended for a discussion but I did think about it and this is my perspective.

I think those aren't a special 5%, I think it's a guarantee there are always going to be 5% or whatever small percent outliers. They are going to outlie. It cannot be stopped or banished, it's going to be present. So, given that it's going to be present, how do I deal with an outlier then? Especially if the outlier is determined to forefront their outlyingness and it's within the rules to do so?

When I think about it from that way I can't be constantly trying to get rid of the 5% and banish it to the corner. I value a contrarian actually, but they have to be a reasonable, open to argument contrarian. I want to see points of view that aren't mine so I can refine mine. There's value to the clash. I could not possibly exist or post on a reddit or a discord because I'd be immediately sycophanted to the corner with [nonsense] and it would come from the homers first and loudest.

[a smell of green grass]

I'm amazed that he is concerned that Fowler may fall back a bit. I look for Fowler to repeat his magic or improve. The only thing that would stop him is injury.

He is more down on Mailloux than most, which is also surprising.

He sees the Bolduc trade as surprising, which is not surprising.

[DawgDad]

Big Shannon fan here, he's just a straightforward guy who loves hockey and due to watching every game has acquired a rare perspective. We get a lot of complaints here that Blues fans are tunnel vision with their own team and there's a ton of merit to that. When you see all the games like he does your entire goal is to call it like you see it for all teams and he does. It's a real honest effort, I appreciate his passion and I appreciate that he figure out how to monetize his straightforward edge.

I lost track of the thread where we were saying which dark horse to make the team out of camp, Dvorsky is 50/50 but I wouldn't call him a dark horse. The dark horse is Kaskimaki IMO. We never talk about him much and he had a nice development year and from Armstrong's comments he is a big Kaskimaki fan.

I think everyone in his bottom 5% (prediction) group is a regular on this forum.

I was a little rude to you the other day, I want to apologize.

Your comment got me thinking, I know yours was a toss-off comment not intended for a discussion but I did think about it and this is my perspective.

I think those aren't a special 5%, I think it's a guarantee there are always going to be 5% or whatever small percent outliers. They are going to outlie. It cannot be stopped or banished, it's going to be present. So, given that it's going to be present, how do I deal with an outlier then? Especially if the outlier is determined to forefront their outlyingness and it's within the rules to do so?

When I think about it from that way I can't be constantly trying to get rid of the 5% and banish it to the corner. I value a contrarian actually, but they have to be a reasonable, open to argument contrarian. I want to see points of view that aren't mine so I can refine mine. There's value to the clash. I could not possibly exist or post on a reddit or a discord because I'd be immediately sycophanted to the corner with [nonsense] and it would come from the homers first and loudest.

Appreciated, but not necessary.

At times sarcasm isn't apparent in posts. My comment above is flippant, off-the-cuff. As for how we deal with trolls and external agendas, well, that's really up to the individual. MN lost his patience in another thread; it happens. My position, which the moderators might not fully support, is we should have as much right to respond to them directly as they do to use this forum to push personal agendas or bait posters. Otherwise, they effectively have special privileges.

[seattleblue]

Big Shannon fan here, he's just a straightforward guy who loves hockey and due to watching every game has acquired a rare perspective. We get a lot of complaints here that Blues fans are tunnel vision with their own team and there's a ton of merit to that. When you see all the games like he does your entire goal is to call it like you see it for all teams and he does. It's a real honest effort, I appreciate his passion and I appreciate that he figure out how to monetize his straightforward edge.

I lost track of the thread where we were saying which dark horse to make the team out of camp, Dvorsky is 50/50 but I wouldn't call him a dark horse. The dark horse is Kaskimaki IMO. We never talk about him much and he had a nice development year and from Armstrong's comments he is a big Kaskimaki fan.

I think everyone in his bottom 5% (prediction) group is a regular on this forum.

I was a little rude to you the other day, I want to apologize.

Your comment got me thinking, I know yours was a toss-off comment not intended for a discussion but I did think about it and this is my perspective.

I think those aren't a special 5%, I think it's a guarantee there are always going to be 5% or whatever small percent outliers. They are going to outlie. It cannot be stopped or banished, it's going to be present. So, given that it's going to be present, how do I deal with an outlier then? Especially if the outlier is determined to forefront their outlyingness and it's within the rules to do so?

When I think about it from that way I can't be constantly trying to get rid of the 5% and banish it to the corner. I value a contrarian actually, but they have to be a reasonable, open to argument contrarian. I want to see points of view that aren't mine so I can refine mine. There's value to the clash. I could not possibly exist or post on a reddit or a discord because I'd be immediately sycophanted to the corner with [nonsense] and it would come from the homers first and loudest.

Appreciated, but not necessary.

At times sarcasm isn't apparent in posts. My comment above is flippant, off-the-cuff. As for how we deal with trolls and external agendas, well, that's really up to the individual. MN lost his patience in another thread; it happens. My position, which the moderators might not fully support, is we should have as much right to respond to them directly as they do to use this forum to push personal agendas or bait posters. Otherwise, they effectively have special privileges.

I can not argue with the right of response / refusal to allow them a special advantage. I tend to agree with you in a moral sense. It's just that the results end up being what the results end up being. They polarize everything and the topics of their arguments and their memorable phrases get repeated forever. It becomes a choice between right of response, which I agree with you is your right, but then the endless back and forth weaves its poisoned way into everything which might be the desired result. So if your entire right of response is to deny them special advantage but ends up giving them exactly what they want which is attention are you really winning? They have set it up for you to lose from the outset: they either get attention or you feel you have let them have a special advantage which is intolerable. If you can't win, don't play. The people you don't like have played this way because they're guaranteed to win every time. A troll's secret success lies in the tragedy of the commons, someone will respond, which everyone knows, so what is to be gained by letting it go by when it's not going to go by? The only harm is the harm that it causes which is a lot, it never dries up. That seems like something we could figure our way out of.

[DawgDad]

Big Shannon fan here, he's just a straightforward guy who loves hockey and due to watching every game has acquired a rare perspective. We get a lot of complaints here that Blues fans are tunnel vision with their own team and there's a ton of merit to that. When you see all the games like he does your entire goal is to call it like you see it for all teams and he does. It's a real honest effort, I appreciate his passion and I appreciate that he figure out how to monetize his straightforward edge.

I lost track of the thread where we were saying which dark horse to make the team out of camp, Dvorsky is 50/50 but I wouldn't call him a dark horse. The dark horse is Kaskimaki IMO. We never talk about him much and he had a nice development year and from Armstrong's comments he is a big Kaskimaki fan.

I think everyone in his bottom 5% (prediction) group is a regular on this forum.

I was a little rude to you the other day, I want to apologize.

Your comment got me thinking, I know yours was a toss-off comment not intended for a discussion but I did think about it and this is my perspective.

I think those aren't a special 5%, I think it's a guarantee there are always going to be 5% or whatever small percent outliers. They are going to outlie. It cannot be stopped or banished, it's going to be present. So, given that it's going to be present, how do I deal with an outlier then? Especially if the outlier is determined to forefront their outlyingness and it's within the rules to do so?

When I think about it from that way I can't be constantly trying to get rid of the 5% and banish it to the corner. I value a contrarian actually, but they have to be a reasonable, open to argument contrarian. I want to see points of view that aren't mine so I can refine mine. There's value to the clash. I could not possibly exist or post on a reddit or a discord because I'd be immediately sycophanted to the corner with [nonsense] and it would come from the homers first and loudest.

Appreciated, but not necessary.

At times sarcasm isn't apparent in posts. My comment above is flippant, off-the-cuff. As for how we deal with trolls and external agendas, well, that's really up to the individual. MN lost his patience in another thread; it happens. My position, which the moderators might not fully support, is we should have as much right to respond to them directly as they do to use this forum to push personal agendas or bait posters. Otherwise, they effectively have special privileges.

I can not argue with the right of response / refusal to allow them a special advantage. I tend to agree with you in a moral sense. It's just that the results end up being what the results end up being. They polarize everything and the topics of their arguments and their memorable phrases get repeated forever. It becomes a choice between right of response, which I agree with you is your right, but then the endless back and forth weaves its poisoned way into everything which might be the desired result. So if your entire right of response is to deny them special advantage but ends up giving them exactly what they want which is attention are you really winning? They have set it up for you to lose from the outset: they either get attention or you feel you have let them have a special advantage which is intolerable. If you can't win, don't play. The people you don't like have played this way because they're guaranteed to win every time. A troll's secret success lies in the tragedy of the commons, someone will respond, which everyone knows, so what is to be gained by letting it go by when it's not going to go by? The only harm is the harm that it causes which is a lot, it never dries up. That seems like something we could figure our way out of.

I get your point, I really do, BUT . . .

I've tried the foe button, I don't like it. The worst poster (IMHO), who I blocked, seems to be long gone.

The thing is, it's not about winning, though some posters are playing games with others. IMHO this is a forum for us to share information, opinions, and stories about the Blues and hockey and our experiences as fans. The only game should be the one where we guess the score and star of game or perhaps a trivia question. When posters disagree at some point adults need to disengage and agree to disagree. That's it, in theory.

But that's not reality, some people abuse privileges (IMHO) and do not afford due respect for others. We can't control it, so each of us that sticks around copes with it in our own way. The good on this forum far outweighs the garbage (based on content quality and value, not volume) but it can be exasperating at times.

[Mr.Snuggleupagus]

Armstrong should've asked for a 2nd or 3rd in addition to Mailloux.

[mph6689new]

Big Shannon fan here, he's just a straightforward guy who loves hockey and due to watching every game has acquired a rare perspective. We get a lot of complaints here that Blues fans are tunnel vision with their own team and there's a ton of merit to that. When you see all the games like he does your entire goal is to call it like you see it for all teams and he does. It's a real honest effort, I appreciate his passion and I appreciate that he figure out how to monetize his straightforward edge.

I lost track of the thread where we were saying which dark horse to make the team out of camp, Dvorsky is 50/50 but I wouldn't call him a dark horse. The dark horse is Kaskimaki IMO. We never talk about him much and he had a nice development year and from Armstrong's comments he is a big Kaskimaki fan.

I think everyone in his bottom 5% (prediction) group is a regular on this forum.

I was a little rude to you the other day, I want to apologize.

Your comment got me thinking, I know yours was a toss-off comment not intended for a discussion but I did think about it and this is my perspective.

I think those aren't a special 5%, I think it's a guarantee there are always going to be 5% or whatever small percent outliers. They are going to outlie. It cannot be stopped or banished, it's going to be present. So, given that it's going to be present, how do I deal with an outlier then? Especially if the outlier is determined to forefront their outlyingness and it's within the rules to do so?

When I think about it from that way I can't be constantly trying to get rid of the 5% and banish it to the corner. I value a contrarian actually, but they have to be a reasonable, open to argument contrarian. I want to see points of view that aren't mine so I can refine mine. There's value to the clash. I could not possibly exist or post on a reddit or a discord because I'd be immediately sycophanted to the corner with [nonsense] and it would come from the homers first and loudest.

Lots of respect for people that self-reflect, and can modify their point of view. Need more of that including from myself.

[smilinjoefission]

I'm amazed that he is concerned that Fowler may fall back a bit. I look for Fowler to repeat his magic or improve. The only thing that would stop him is injury.

He is more down on Mailloux than most, which is also surprising.

He sees the Bolduc trade as surprising, which is not surprising.

I'm more concerned about Holloway repeating and/or improving his season...that was a stellar season he had, lofty goals to be 30+ goals, 70+ points. Proper concern to worry about Fowler, he could morph into Leddy; no D, no offense, but I don't see it...he's just light years better than Leddy was.

[MandatoryDenial]

he's hard to watch

This has not been my experience.

[DawgDad]

I'm amazed that he is concerned that Fowler may fall back a bit. I look for Fowler to repeat his magic or improve. The only thing that would stop him is injury.

He is more down on Mailloux than most, which is also surprising.

He sees the Bolduc trade as surprising, which is not surprising.

I'm more concerned about Holloway repeating and/or improving his season...that was a stellar season he had, lofty goals to be 30+ goals, 70+ points. Proper concern to worry about Fowler, he could morph into Leddy; no D, no offense, but I don't see it...he's just light years better than Leddy was.

Holloway is a key, for sure. Anxiously waiting to see if he's fully healed and flying around the ice again.

I'm not concerned about Fowler.