The Unknown Poster

Peter Tessier: The Jets face the Wild tonight for their first pre-season game of the training camp season. The part of tonight’s game that is of interest is the line combinations and as of now we will finally see what Paul Maurice wants to look at. At least we can begin to speculate on what he is looking at. Stafford Scheifele Wheeler Perreault Burmistrov Ehlers Lemieux Copp Armia Thorburn Petan Raffl Enstrom Byfuglien Stuart Trouba Morrissey Kitchton Pavelec The quick takeaway from this line up is Maurice wants so see his younger, less-known players in a line up that resembles what might be seen in the regular season. While it seems odd to put Petan, a skilled playmaking centre on a line with Thorburn, he is playing with Raffl who is a big, skilled winger that has come over from the Swiss league and is the brother of Michael Raffl from the Flyers. Ehlers, Lemieux, Copp, Armia Morrissey, Kichton, Petan and Raffl are all getting the first pro look tonight, and to a lesser extent Burmistrov too as he makes his return to the NHL. It’s a balanced roster of verteran presence with a youthful injection of prospects which according to all indication and analysis this past summer is what Jets fans can expect to see but not quite to this degree. The above-mentioned players are fighting for spots, with established vets and among themselves. As it’s been said in this space before it will be hard for Morrissey to crack the roster and probably less likely for Kichton but viewing their games is important. Maurice and Chevy need to know who is ready to be called up when injuries inevitably hit the team and it always seems to start with defence. The line that is the most intriguing among the forwards is the Perreault Burmistrov Ehlers line as it represents what could be a very realistic line come the regular season, but that mostly depends on the play of Ehlers. Perreault and Burmistrov are ‘possession darlings’ and drive the play through their puck control and handling. Perreault is a tenacious fore-checker and Burmistrov, if Jets fans recall, was the same on the PK when he was paired with Kane. Both of these players have more than a north-south game could be the magic elixr to feed the future ‘scoring-winger’ Ehlers. As with former Jet, Evander Kane, Burmistrov could play a pivotal role with setting up and doing the so-called ‘spade work’ before Ehlers gets the reward. That reward is scoring opportunities and shots and Ehlers has to match the tenacity of his line mates if he expects opportunities to appear. The other line that should be of interest is Lemieux-Copp-Armia. Brendan Lemieux has come to camp and raised some eye-brows from fans who have seen him thus far. He comes with a reputation of hard play and having former NHLer Claude Lemieux as a father probably only exaggerates what people see and expect. But what about Armia? He played a bit with the IceCaps last season but had little impact with 2 goals and 8 assists in 21 games. In fairness to the player, no one had much impact on the Ice Caps last year aside from Conner Hellebyuck. Andrew Copp is another player to watch and seemingly the heir apparent to the 4th line centre position held by former Jet stalwart Jim Slater. Is it likely that this trio stays as a line? Probably not this season but it’s not too far-fetched to think that Maurice sees something that would make him think about the future. As mentioned above this is about seeing players in the bigger setting and how they play and knowing where these three sit is going to be important. There is less intrigue in the defence pairings as it’s a pretty much WSYWYG situation, what you see is what you get. Icing two veteran pairs and letting Morrissey and Kichton go together gives Maurice the comparison view of who is a better call-up if necessary, but that is assuming neither starts in Winnipeg which I think is a safe assumption. While Stafford Scheifele and Wheeler take top line duties tonight it will be the lines below who are the ones to watch as the Jets host the Wild to open their NHL pre-season schedule. ****Whats the thought on Raffl?? Intriguing guy. Big body, experienced...

@GlobalNational: NDP claims top Trudeau economic adviser at odds with Liberal pension policy http://t.co/Yi2lQtMHXr#Elxn42

Here is an interesting one: Washington (CNN)Ben Carson said Monday he could indeed support a Muslim for president -- despite words to the contrary on Sunday -- should they pledge fealty to the Constitution. Carson, under fire for seeming to suggest that he couldn't support anyone who subscribes to Islam to lead the White House, issued a caveat to that position on Monday evening. In an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity, the Republican presidential candidate said there are some Muslims who could be president if they effectively renounced their faith. "If someone has a Muslim background and they're willing to reject those tenets and to accept the way of life that we have and clearly will swear to place our Constitution above their religion ... I would then be quite willing to support them," he said. In a post on Facebook also on Monday night, Carson reiterated that position. "I could never support a candidate for President of the United States that was Muslim and had not renounced the central tenant of Islam: Sharia Law," he wrote. "I know that there are many peaceful Muslims who do not adhere to these beliefs. But until these tenants are fully renounced...I cannot advocate any Muslim candidate for President. ****He had previously said while he had many Muslim friends he would not support a Muslim as President. And I find it interesting...because I'd assume most of us here have no racial bias against Muslim's but do we make an internal caveat that we *do* have a problem with Muslim's who follow all the beliefs of that religion? Conversely, when the President is sworn in and swears to uphold the constitution, doesnt that trump any religion? And yet, do they not swear "so help me God"? Would a Christian zealot be any less dangerous than a Muslim president? I find this interesting because there was a family uproar this past week when a relative of my gf was posting very anti-Muslim sentiments online...things such as Memes making fun of Muslim's etc. She called him out and his defense was that Muslim's are killing people and sneaking into the country and we have to stop them and send them back. He made no distinction between Muslim's and radical Islam. Obviously he was incorrect. But where does the line get drawn for most people? And again, relating to the US election, Trump got into trouble because someone asking him a question referred to Obama as a Muslim and Trump didn't correct him. Ultimately the question of "would you support a Muslim president" seems tantamount to the old "when did you stop beating your wife" legal question. Is there an answer that doesnt screw the candidate?

Great statement by Walters. He really hedged and some people cant see it. If no one from the team officially discussed this job with him, how can he "intend" to leave? Thats the key. No one has discussed it, no one has offered it. Team Boosters dont count. Thats why the U likely engaged their boosters to feel Kyle out, so everyone has deniability. When Kyle accepts the job he will say that back when he issued this statement, no one from the team had talked to him and he had no intention of leaving. But things change. And even if people get pissy with Kyle over it, what does he care? If he has to take a bit of heat later, he's doing the right thing for the team by trying to nip this in the bud right now.

Okay, whew thought so...thats what came up when I started typing so I;ve used it before. But then it sounded weird when spoken out loud. PoMo it is.

THE GLOBE'S ELECTION FORECAST Liberals closing gap, but NDP and Conservatives still on top Our election forecast, based on recent polls and historical data, projects the likelihood that a given party would win the most seats, if an election were held today. Our algorithm was designed in consultation with political scientist Paul Fairie (read more about how it works). This page will be updated frequently with new polls. Scroll down to explore the data. Last updated: Thursday, Sept. 22, 2015 If the election happened today, there is a ... 39% chance that the Conservatives get the most seats 41% chance that the NDP gets the most seats 23% chance that the Liberals gets the most seats 21% chance that the Green party gets more than one seat 18% chance that all three main parties at 100 seats or more 1% chance that any party gets a majority

PoMo? PaMa? friggen iphone. Whats the acceptable short form version of Paul Maurice? I need to type it about 50 times so my iphone doesnt auto correct it lol

Wow you're so objective about what can be politicized! tongue in cheek. Stop being so serious. lol

If thats a major issue this election, we've run out of issues. I think Trudeau having nary a clue as to the cost of his promises would mean more to Canadians than a minor pissing contest over charity donations between a political party and a few private citizens who are clearly not conservative supporters.

Clearly, some outlet covered it, or you wouldn't have come across it. But, hey, the media also missed Harper's lousy interview too. Oh wait, there wasn't one. Because he won't answer more than 5 questions at any presser, screens his conferences so only "approved" media and attendees show up, and has his crony supporters hurl insults at anyone who asks an uncomfortable question. If security hasn't already removed them. So you're comparing the media not covering a non-existent Harper interview with the media not covering a poorly performed Trudeau interview? Talk about spin! ;-)

Wasnt everyone raving about Simmons a couple of weeks ago?

Are any of the Jets' pre-season games televised?

Didnt MOS admit the team looked unprepared for the first 31 minutes of the game? Who's responsible for that? I dont know about practice. But if the players are unprepared who's ass should be on the line for that?

Yes Im sure they dont care about people with Cancer. Stephen Harper hates you if you have cancer! lol This is an amusing study. Firstly, this issue is about 425th on my list of things I give an F about so I have virtually no feelings either way. But I bet the Fox family werent Conservatives. And I bet if they are NDP'ers and Mulcair said this, they'd not have reacted outside of praising his generosity. Politicizing it works both ways. Someone made a post on FB a few days ago that essentially said guess who left their campaign bus running for 5 hours while he was inside talking about the climate, it was Mulcair. And the responses ranged from talking about how certain engines need to run constantly to how desperate "Conservatives" were to mention something so frivolous. There is a lot of frivolity on both sides. Although the bus issue would probably be 424th on my list of things I give an F about but I thought it was a funny mention. And people reacted so angrily. Its been a long election (though Trudeau admitted it was good for Canadians), it will be nice when it's over.

Yeah I think he's hoping Perreault-Burmi-Ehlers can be something. Speaking of hitting the gym, Scheif has gone from 170lbs his first year to 207lbs this year.

How dare they donate to charity. What animals!

it makes sense but you have to draw a line. Tillman is a POS and that was before he took a liking to his kid's babysitter. But you have high fives for Jagr for bedding a teenager? Redheads of the world just can't catch a break. Big big big difference between an 18 year old that consented and a minor who didn't. I mean really.....you don't see a massive difference??!

There's no media bias. Just every news outlet missed Jt's lousy interview.

It is for sure an interesting theory. Not that this should play too much into Maurice's decision on this, but Lowry is an RFA next year. If he does start logging 1st line minutes and put up decent points playing beside Little and Ladd, wonder what that does for his next contract. Think Chevy is saying to PoMo "uhhh hey, lets not get too ahead of ourselves here. Third line sounds right until we have a six year deal in our pockets"

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Peter-Tessier/Jets-Trying-Lowry-as-1-Centre/161/71091 Some fancy stats to explain the experiment with Lowry at 1C and how it actually might be very beneficial. I like it to a degree. It raises the bar for Lowry, gives us a bigger, stronger 1C and might elevate Ladd's grit game even more. My only concern is Lowry not being able to hold is own offensively and bringing down Little & Ladd's offensive numbers. But the way Lowry plays, that line might score more points, albeit less pretty ones and more hard working ones.

It did look legit. I didn't think he would finish the match to be honest. But good on him for toughing it out... however this is the risk with a guy who is that old. Just far more prone to injury. Yeah, look at Kevin Nash. Blew his quad simply by *walking* in his first match back in WWE. Remember when McMahon tore both his quads entering the ring? Yup. That was ridiculous. Even moreso since Cena & Batista blew the finish, otherwise he wasnt going to be down there anyway.

Yup. There might be some other circumstantial evidence. Her immediately calling for help, going to the ER etc...that would be evidence in her favour. Any witnesses to her or his actions (and reportedly her friend was with her) before, during, after would be used. The fact the DA went to a Grand Jury is interesting. Im not as familar with US law ofcourse, but if the police responded to a claim and found no evidence, couldnt they simply choose to not proceed? Then it gets sent to the DA and they could choose not to proceed. A Grand Jury almost certainly returns an indictment. So...I would suspect the DA believes the victim's account but doesnt have enough evidence to proceed without her. So it probably comes down to whether Kane is willing to pay her off or not. Edit: Also, lack of DNA from the rape kit doesnt mean an examination found nothing. There could be other physical evidence that support her accusation.

It did look legit. I didn't think he would finish the match to be honest. But good on him for toughing it out... however this is the risk with a guy who is that old. Just far more prone to injury. Yeah, look at Kevin Nash. Blew his quad simply by *walking* in his first match back in WWE.

Wrestlingobserver: Sting's injury was legitimate and we're trying to get more information on it. The early reports we have is that the injury was significant. Also, word is its a neck injury.

That certainly complicates things and explains why the DA would back off while Kane and the accuser were negotiating. To them, if she backed out, it would be difficult to proceed. If they had DNA, they could proceed even without her cooperation. And it also explains the reports that Kane walked away from negotiations at one point. Probably weighing the pay off versus a trial. And...explains the Blackhawks' actions, being told "there is no DNA". I wouldnt be so quick to embrace Kane though, if I were them. Even without DNA, it doesnt clear him and a victim on the witness stand can be compelling to a jury, especially considering Kane's poor judgement in the past.