Rich

http://www.nationalmemo.com/an-engineer-explains-why-trumps-wall-is-so-implausible/ An engineer breaks down what it would cost to build a wall. He comes to the conclusion it would have to concrete (chain link fencing would not accomplish its purpose). Here are some interesting assumptions he makes: I wish he would cost this out, but it sounds damn expensive. What would the cost benefit analysis look like?

Interesting article in the Globe and Mail from former player and current majority owner of the Halifax Mooseheads Bobby Smith http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/end-to-fighting-would-not-make-hockey-a-safer-game/article29300049/ He basically says fighting causes less concussions per game played than body checking and elbows. Further he says fighting is needed as a deterrent to the above mentioned reckless plays that cause concussions and that players need to police themselves. If true, isn't this a failure on the direction given to the referees on how they call the game? Isn't this really a refs job? No other sport needs fighting for self policing. Why hockey?

An interesting article up on cfl.ca of how Bass made it to the CFL. http://www.cfl.ca/2016/03/20/breakout-star-khalil-bass-never-took-no-for-an-answer/

Nice goal to tie it.

The kid is stepping up big time in the playoffs.

I think we have to get rid of one of Pavelec or Hutch next season. I don't want to see Hutch sent down. Assuming Hellebuyck is up with the Jets next year, that leaves Comrie and Olkinuora (current in the ECHL) with the Moose. We also have Jamie Phillips who has really come on strong in the NCAA this year. 13th in the NCAA with a GAA of 1.97 and 27th with a save percentage of .922. Good enough IMO to at least get consideration for the backup job with the Moose. With what Hutch has shown over the last 2 seasons, I don't think he is much more than an NHL backup. Even if he is sent to the Moose next year, I can't see him being the starter and taking development time from Comrie. And I'd much rather see the backup job go to Olkinuora or Phillips. If you trade Pavelec then sign Hutch for a 1 - 2 year deal until Comrie is ready to come up (even if the second year Hutch ends up playing for the Moose). Or if no one wants to bite on Pavelec, trade Hutch for whatever you can get as I don't think he should be taking playing time away from the other development goalies. My preference would be to trade Pavelec, even if we have to retain some salary.

There was a video montage of Ladd in the first commercial break if the 1st period. Whole arena gave him a standing o during the whole thing.

I'm at the game. First time I've put on the Ladd jersey since he was traded. Jets season is done. Gonna show appreciation for what he did for this team and city.

The city, team, and owners haven't even been announced. It isn't even guaranteed to happen.

This is what is being reported as the current proposal, it isn't just Chevy. Basically if you want to protect more then 3 d-men, the price for that is less players you can protect overall.

I thought playoff teams drafted based on the order they were eliminated from the playoffs.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/oseg-redblacks-fan-lawsuit-lansdowne-1.3494474

According to this site though, NMC follow players after a trade. https://www.capfriendly.com/faq#nmc_ntc

Speculation in a jetsnation article that came out yesterday. http://jetsnation.ca/2016/3/17/nhl-expansion-and-what-it-means-to-the-jets/score I've never heard of anything like that before either. I'm still thinking there is a good chance NMC may be exempt from the expansion as a NMC only limits trades, waivers, and loans.

There is for sure a connection. But it is also a stand alone film.

Or wait for clarification from the NHL. You do see the problem with moving players with no movement clauses?

I believe this is the text from the current CBA: I'm not a lawyer, but unless you can interpret an expansion draft as a trade, loan, or waiver claim, I would think NMC don't apply to an expansion draft.

The NMC / NTC discussion I think will also be very interesting to watch unfold with the PA. I'm not sure the legalities of how the NMC can be applied to expansion, and the NHL has already said they are negotiating with the PA on how expansion will work, but expansion has to be in the best interest of the PA because it will create more jobs and it will increase the price of free agents as a new team will have a whole bunch of more money to spend. Both things that are in the PA's interest. But do they try to balance or fight that with NMC of players already under contract. A player with a NMC cannot even be placed on waivers. Could you force them to go to an expansion team?

I think it is over thinking it if you look at the flip side of the argument. You can't expose UFAs so you have to expose players under contract, which means you could theoretically only get to protect a smaller number of players then everyone else. Given the fact that teams only have one year to plan for this and most NHL contracts (of "desirable" players anyway) are multi year, you let it fall however it falls. If teams knew 4 - 5 years in advance and could strategically decide how to structure their contracts, it might be a different story. Enstrom also has a NMC so the issues on how that may or may not affect expansion aside, trading him may not be so easy. You will have a limited number of teams you can go to, and each of those teams is already stuck with only 3 D-men they can protect. So what are they going to give up in a trade for someone they may just lose anyway. Unless you are getting under market value for him and the other team wants him to hedge their bets on exposing some other player. I'm sure there is going to be a ton of strategizing and manoeuvring that comes out of this. Going to be very interesting to watch unfold. Last expansion draft teams also traded draft picks for "futures" where the future was don't draft this player we left unprotected. Which to an expansion team, building their prospect pool may be more important than grabbing a 3rd liner where they could pick-up the equivalent in free agency.

Early draft projection from Yahoo has us losing Enstrom. http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/what-if-the-nhl-expansion-draft-was-held-today-211129955.html Here would be their projections on what the expansion team would look like:

Chevy is on H&L right now and his understanding is they would be 2nd year players.

That is a huge difference for the Jets. Petan would be in that list as well (doubt anyone would take him with the others we would have to expose). If those players are excluded for 2017, then it would really be in the Jets interest for two teams to come in 2017, because a second team in 2018 or 2019 would include all of those players as well as possibly Connor if he makes the team next year.

It isn't confirmed 2 goalies on the 8 players. So far everything says 1 goalie so I'd go with that Not a guarantee on losing two players either. It could still be only one new team. How is it we lose Comrie when players on ELC seem to be exempt?

Interesting way of looking at it.