first_img Derrick Hall satisfied with D-backs’ buying and selling Former Cardinals kicker Phil Dawson retires Top Stories Grace expects Greinke trade to have emotional impact Comments   Share   Tight endIt was not a strong draft or free-agency period for tight ends. Regardless, coach Bruce Arians loves his wide receivers, and thankfully Arizona has one of the best trios with Larry Fitzgerald, John Brown and Michael Floyd. However, if this offense were missing another dimension, it would be a prolific pass-catching tight end. Troy Niklas, a second-round pick in 2014, has simply not worked out, leaving the team to roll again with Jermaine Gresham and Darren Fells. The two combined for only 39 catches in 2015, but Fells did rank third in DVOA compared to 38th for the slower Gresham.It’s an interesting position to choose because, as we’ve all seen, Arians’ offense does not normally feature the tight end. Even if it did, while the Cardinals don’t have a star at the position, their group that includes a now-healthy Gresham, Fells, Niklas and Ifeanyi Momah, who is recovering from a torn ACL, offers an intriguing mix of size and speed.However, the point seems to be that an impact tight end would make Arizona’s excellent offense even better, and of that there is little doubt. The 5: Takeaways from the Coyotes’ introduction of Alex Meruelo Arizona Cardinals’ Darren Fells reacts during the second half the NFL football NFC Championship game against the Carolina Panthers, Sunday, Jan. 24, 2016, in Charlotte, N.C. (AP Photo/Bob Leverone) A look up and down the Arizona Cardinals’ roster would reveal a pretty loaded team.There are Pro Bowl performers at nearly every position on both offense and defense, along with a good amount of depth, too.However, that does not mean the roster still cannot be improved.Over at, the Football Outsiders folks put together a list of the biggest remaining hole for each of the NFL’s 32 teams, and their choice for the Cardinals may come as a bit of a surprise.last_img read more

first_img Join the conversation → CALGARY — As websites go, it doesn’t stand out. Unlike the polished, visually appealing sites the governing NDP and opposition UCP have launched to attack each other in recent weeks, this one has the black-and-white esthetic of a Windows 95 text document. However bland and antiquated its look, though, it inserts a set of damning allegations into the middle of this Alberta election campaign.The site, not-so-artfully named after the person running it, was launched earlier this month by lawyer and former power executive Robert Hemstock, who is currently suing the Alberta government, Deputy Premier Sarah Hoffman and NDP Premier Rachel Notley’s top spokesperson Cheryl Oates for defamation. It breaks down in lawyerly detail what Hemstock considers to be a series of mistakes the NDP government made as it changed the rules governing the province’s deregulated electricity market — moves he claims cost Alberta power consumers $2 billion, a niggling scandal of the NDP’s first term.Hemstock filed the defamation suit in July 2018, based on events dating as far back as 2015, when Notley’s New Democrats were elected. The website went live after he filed a new affidavit on March 29.He launched the suit because he believes the government unfairly blamed him for a series of contract cancellations in the power market in 2015 and 2016, based on a clause he helped negotiate into those contracts in 2000. Alberta election issues, explained: Pipelines ‘I’ve got four parties to my right’: Is Jason Kenney conservative enough for Alberta? Alberta election expected to focus on the economy — but NDP hopes to make it all about Jason Kenney He launched the website because he wants to “expose” the details of the controversial episode, and because he believes the public doesn’t understand how or why those cancelled contracts ended up saddling consumers “with an estimated $2 billion in unnecessary costs” — and how the province could have avoided those mistakes in order to save Albertans money.Both the suit and the website also appear to be an attempt by Hemstock to clear his name.“It’s also about how our elected representatives in the Alberta Government used their position of power and access to taxpayer funds to attempt to achieve their political objective of avoiding accountability,” the website charges.Hemstock declined to comment on the site because his defamation suit is still before the court but the affidavit filed March 29 contains a new allegation that the government has not provided all the documents requested in the case.“That a decision was made to defame me, by implicating me as the cause of the loss of approximately $2 billion to electricity consumers, with no records showing how that decision was arrived at discloses the defendants have not discharged their obligation to provide all relevant material records,” Hemstock states in the affidavit.“I’m not aware of anything new being filed, but because the matter is before the courts we won’t be commenting,” said Oates, who was Notley’s communications director before the writ dropped and is working on the NDP campaign.It is a scandal. It is absolutely a scandal Twitter April 11, 20197:00 AM EDTLast UpdatedApril 11, 20197:00 AM EDT Filed under News Cheryl Oates, left, spokesperson for Rachel Notley, has been named in a lawsuit also targeting Notley and MLA Sarah Hoffman, deputy premier in the last NDP government, for alleged defamation over contract cancellations in the power market in 2015 and 2016.Jim Wells/Postmedia/File Industry groups have also sharply criticized how the government handled the series of cancelled contracts.“Albertans should be concerned about the government’s $2.25-billion loan to the Balancing Pool and the mounting interest cost (about $400 million), which will need to be repaid,” the Independent Power Producers Society of Alberta said in a release.The controversy is not a key focus in the current Alberta election, partly because it’s so complicated, but it is a point that parties have included in their platforms.The UCP has promised that, if it forms government, it will “Ask the Auditor General of Alberta to conduct a special duty audit of the NDP-incurred financial losses on the power purchase agreements held through the Balancing Pool.”In an emailed statement, the UCP said the NDP has not been transparent about their electricity market changes.Hemstock’s defamation case is expected to drag on long after the April 16 election. He believes the government blamed him for the power contracts being handed over to the Balancing Pool.In their statement of defence, the provincial government, Hoffman and Oates state they never referenced Hemstock directly and “as such, the statements cannot be defamatory or cause harm to the plaintiff, as alleged or at all.”The defence also states that comments were made “as senior government officers in the performance of their official duties and are protected by absolute privilege” and their comments were “based on true facts about matters of public interest and are fair comment on a matter of public interest.”• Email: | Twitter: Geoffrey Morgan Facebook More Alberta’s electricity sector is unique in Canada and is confusing even for Albertans. The province has no Crown corporation like BC Hydro, SaskPower or Hydro Quebec that produces and distributes power to its residents. Instead a jumble of private-sector companies and some city-owned utilities like Calgary’s Enmax Corp. own the power plants, transmission lines and distribution networks while multiple provincial government agencies regulate or oversee the market.In the middle of 2015, the province’s then-new NDP government increased the price industrial companies had to pay for emitting carbon in the province, which triggered an opt-out clause for many of those power producers, letting them cancel their contracts to purchase power in the province.On his website, Hemstock called the price increase “a mistake” that government ought to have known would trigger the opt-out clause. Further mistakes, Hemstock alleges, include trying to deflect blame for the cancelled contracts, and specifically, going “on the offensive” by blaming him.The government called the opt-out clause the “Enron clause,” after Enron Canada had asked for it to be added before that now-defunct company agreed to bid on power contracts.Hemstock was in-house counsel for Enron Canada in the late 1990s when Alberta was in the midst of deregulating its electricity market and when the contracts in question were signed. He later joined Enmax as an executive.Robert Hemstock in 2004. He is currently suing Alberta’s NDP government and two top NDP officials for defamation. Recommended For YouU.S. FDA approves Karyopharm Therapeutics’ blood cancer drugOntario Cannabis Store pulls affected CannTrust products amid Health Canada probeUPDATE 2-FDA approves expanded label for Regeneron/Sanofi’s DupixentTrump pick for Fed seat says doesn’t want to pull rug from under market -CNBCAP Explains: US sanctions on Huawei bite, but who gets hurt? Comment Share this storyEx-energy executive’s website and affidavit drops niggling NDP scandal into middle of Alberta election Tumblr Pinterest Google+ LinkedIn center_img Featured Stories Email Ex-energy executive’s website and affidavit drops niggling NDP scandal into middle of Alberta election Robert Hemstock is suing the Alberta government for defamation because he believes it unfairly blamed him for a series of costly contract cancellations in the power market Reddit 21 Comments advertisement What you need to know about passing the family cottage to the next generation Sponsored By: Leah Hennel/Postmedia/File In his defamation suit, Hemstock said he was employed by Enron Canada and “was not employed by nor did he advise (parent company) Enron Corporation in relation to any financial reporting obligations in the United States of America, at any time.”Enron Corp. — rather than Enron Canada — collapsed amid a corporate scandal that included misleading investors and falsifying financial information.In December 2015, Enmax became the first company to make use of the opt-out clause and handed the money-losing contracts it was holding over to an arms-length government agency called the Balancing Pool.In the following months, other money-losing power contracts were also handed to the Balancing Pool, shifting the potential losses from the contracts from companies directly onto Albertans.One power executive, speaking on condition of anonymity because they didn’t want to run afoul of the government or comment on the defamation case, said the case should be “a cautionary tale when it comes to political interference in the electric market” because electricity “is a complicated but essential commodity.”The issue stirred up controversy in Alberta — though many residents don’t fully understand what happened — as the government moved to support the Balancing Pool through a loan.“What I can’t fully grasp, and perhaps this is a failing on my part in opposition, is how it is that $2.2 billion has gone into the Balancing Pool, backstopped by Alberta taxpayers, and it isn’t the single greatest scandal that Albertans have seen,” said Greg Clark, then leader of the Alberta Party, in the province’s legislature in May 2017. “It is a scandal. It is absolutely a scandal.”A decision was made to defame me ← Previous Next →last_img read more