loadofmularkey Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 What about Peters? I think they can afford to lose him a while. The trend here is this: Cheapshot a Sabre, NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. Great trend that. 874846[/snapback] Wait, it's a trend? Hmm. Define "trend". I could've sworn that game against Washington actually happened a few weeks ago, but I guess I dreamt that Gaustad and Mair started dealing out ass-kickings seconds after Briere got hit from behind by AO. Yeah what a pussified bunch the Sabres are. I can't for wait for other teams to expose our weakness. The fact that you think coming off the bench is a logical idea tells me everything I need to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5 Wide Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 If the Sabres had piled off the bench, we'd be talking about Lindy serving a suspension, and a multitude of suspensions. If Peters leaves the bench, Nashville players leave the bench. With a salary cap situation already stretched to its limits the Sabres can't afford to call up 5 guys to cover for suspensions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 You're right Joe. We should take isolated incidents and blow them all out of proportion. Nice liberal thinking there. Welcome to why the welfare state was created. LMAO. Isolated incidents. It's no coincidence it's happened twice in a month. You're right. I will guarantee he'd do something if the Sabres pulled what you're wishing for and it'd very likely screw us out of any chance at the Stanley Cup. Don't worry, you've never been able to get the big picture, so today won't be any different. Great. Hope that helps when some goon tries to take out Vanek. So, wer as fans are supposed to just sit there and accept the fact that this goon won't be punished NEARLY severely enough? How many games was Ovechkin suspended, by the by? Your "logic" is based on paranoia. Not alot of good because the NHL has essentially taken away that facet of the game, which allows guys like Nichols to go off. It's not a good situation but there's not a damn thing your solution would do to solve it. Newsflash: the lack of respect between players happens in virtually ever game, virtually every night. Has nothing to do with how many tough guys a team has. It wouldn't happen if teams could retaliate properly. Yeah, Buttman screwed the pooch with that rule change. But it DISTURBS me that this team refuses to stick up for itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loadofmularkey Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 But it DISTURBS me that this team refuses to stick up for itself. 874876[/snapback] So then you didn't watch the game against Washington. Got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 WTF good is Peters if you can't send him out there to !@#$ that guy's world up? 874858[/snapback] I heard today on the radio that there is a rule about gooning it up with under 5 minutes to go in the game that involves huge suspensions and fines. Therefore, if Peters played 3 minutes over the game's first 58, and then Ruff sent him out with 2 minutes left to get in a fight and start a rumble, Peters would've been subjected to big-time fines and suspensions. Who cares, right? It's only Peters. However, the heaviest suspensions and fines are levied on the coach who sends him out there. Up 5-2 with 4 minutes left, Ruff was in no position to play a retaliation game against an out-of-conference team, which could've cost him 10+ games away from the bench. The unfortunate thing about the unbalanced schedule is that out-of-conference teams can take these liberties, because payback won't come until minimally the next season. When Darcy Tucker lays a cheapie, there are five or six opportunities that season to make the guy feel it in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 Not sure. I know what you're saying, we don't want Danny Briere breaking a hand while trying to goon it up. Maybe Marty and Paetsch were the only ones who truly saw the punch, so that's why they were the ones reacting. 874860[/snapback] The Nashville broadcast showed a great angle of Marty. He was on his way to take out Nichol before he even landed the punch. The beauty of the Ovechkin hit was that Gaustad had three punches to the face before Alex knew what was going on. I fully understand DB, JP, and JH are not Gaustad. I just would've liked to have seen the same urgency in defense of a teammate. Even if they didn't realize what happened, when you turn around and see your goalie throwing the blocker around, you know it must've been serious. Upon watching the replay, Hecht in particular definitely saw what happened and had the opportunity to step in. He instead chose to let his goalie do the business while he grabbed somebody's sleeve. 874860[/snapback] Two players were already on top of Nichol, one of them being a goalie. Hecht did the right thing. He turned around so he could keep any Nashville players from joining in. Remember, Spacek is out cold on the ground. You don't want anyone else jumping in on that fight in that situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 So then you didn't watch the game against Washington. Got it. 874877[/snapback] Yeah, I saw some "punches" thrown at Ovechkin. He was out on the ice the following game. Woo hoo. He took a shot at Briere that could have ended his season. He should get the same in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 With a salary cap situation already stretched to its limits the Sabres can't afford to call up 5 guys to cover for suspensions. 874875[/snapback] This is an excellent point, and something that Lindy was probably thinking while we were calling for blood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 If the Sabres had piled off the bench, we'd be talking about Lindy serving a suspension, and a multitude of suspensions. If Peters leaves the bench, Nashville players leave the bench. With a salary cap situation already stretched to its limits the Sabres can't afford to call up 5 guys to cover for suspensions. 874875[/snapback] Actually, the salaries for suspended players do not count against the cap during the suspension. The cap isn't an issue here. But yeah, anything leading to massive suspensions would be a horrible move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 22, 2006 Author Share Posted December 22, 2006 LMAO. Isolated incidents. It's no coincidence it's happened twice in a month. Sure Joe. Great. Hope that helps when some goon tries to take out Vanek. So, wer as fans are supposed to just sit there and accept the fact that this goon won't be punished NEARLY severely enough? Nah. You should jump down there and exact some justice. Tough guy. How many games was Ovechkin suspended, by the by? None. Because the NHL sucks at this stuff. They pretty much always have. Your "logic" is based on paranoia. I'd ask you if there are any mirrors in your world, but I'm not sure you'd understand that. It wouldn't happen if teams could retaliate properly. Yeah, Buttman screwed the pooch with that rule change. But it DISTURBS me that this team refuses to stick up for itself. You're so full of crap. Gaustad was on his horse the second he hit the ice and Mair absolutely pummeled his guy. There was NOTHING positive to be gained from sending Peters out last night with under 5 to go in a blowout. I don't care if you agree with me. You're wrong so many times that it's a shock when you're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 Yeah, I saw some "punches" thrown at Ovechkin. He was out on the ice the following game. Woo hoo. He took a shot at Briere that could have ended his season. He should get the same in return. 874881[/snapback] I'd rather ours were the standup guys who stick up for themselves but don't take the cheap shot. You'd be the first guy blaming Peters if he pulled a Bertuzzi the next time these teams met. Ovechkin should have been fined more and suspended. He wasn't. That's the league's problem, not the Sabres'. They should just play their game. As it is, It wasn't like Ovechkin leaving that game helped the Sabres to victory in that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 I'd rather ours were the standup guys who stick up for themselves but don't take the cheap shot. You'd be the first guy blaming Peters if he pulled a Bertuzzi the next time these teams met. Ovechkin should have been fined more and suspended. He wasn't. That's the league's problem, not the Sabres'. They should just play their game. As it is, It wasn't like Ovechkin leaving that game helped the Sabres to victory in that one. 874899[/snapback] Ovechkin deserved 15. He got 0. That's the bottom line. So if the league isn't protecting skill players, SOMEONE has to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 22, 2006 Author Share Posted December 22, 2006 I'd rather ours were the standup guys who stick up for themselves but don't take the cheap shot. Never mind the fact that once you start pulling that crap it gives the other teams license to do it and the referees start screwing you with tons of marginal calls. You'd be the first guy blaming Peters if he pulled a Bertuzzi the next time these teams met. You got that right. Joe would make ICE look lucid. Ovechkin should have been fined more and suspended. He wasn't. That's the league's problem, not the Sabres'. They should just play their game. As it is, It wasn't like Ovechkin leaving that game helped the Sabres to victory in that one. 874899[/snapback] Correct all the way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 Ovechkin deserved 15. He got 0. That's the bottom line. So if the league isn't protecting skill players, SOMEONE has to. 874900[/snapback] Mair and Goose got ejected from that game sticking up for their man, Joe. What else can you ask for? You know as well as I do that the league has always protected its stars. Always. Bertuzzi was an exception because his foul was so egregious, it caused a big injury, and it was on open-ice. We are winning by playing within the rules. If you want to see an example of what gooning it up and playing by the old rules does for you, look down the road at the idiots masquerading as hockey players in orange and black. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 22, 2006 Author Share Posted December 22, 2006 Ovechkin deserved 15. He got 0. That's the bottom line. So if the league isn't protecting skill players, SOMEONE has to. 874900[/snapback] Yeah, that's the spirit. Let's screw ourselves out of the best shot we've had at the Cup in thirty years!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EndZoneCrew Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 Yeah, I saw some "punches" thrown at Ovechkin. He was out on the ice the following game. Woo hoo. He took a shot at Briere that could have ended his season. He should get the same in return. 874881[/snapback] I am going to rip off my arm and throw it on the ice for intimidation on Tuesday.....this will be followed by chants that we want Ovechkins blood!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loadofmularkey Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 Ovechkin deserved 15. He got 0. That's the bottom line. So if the league isn't protecting skill players, SOMEONE has to. 874900[/snapback] Wow, another brilliant statement. Yes, let's make this a vigilante league just like all the other major sports, and society for that matter. If one of our guys had retaliated by chucking a cheap shot at AO after the hit, I have no doubt we would've been praised by the league and hockey fans across the continent for showing AO who's the boss. That'll put the fear of God into other teams and show them the Buffalo Sabres are not a team to be messed with. Ooorrrr....maybe we would've ridiculed, drawn an uncessary amount of attention, lost a coach/player or two to suspension and derailed what could be a championship season in the making. I absolutely cannot believe your ignorance. Basically your beef here is with the NHL for not suspending AO four weeks ago. Quit saying the Sabres don't stand up for themselves and quit defining "standing up for themselves" as "hitting the other guy just as bad, or worse, than he hit us." Because then you're Scott Nichol. The very thing you're pissed off about today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taterhill Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 Joe...your nonsense gives me a headache...by your logic..Rip Simoneck should be packing some heat and unload a flurry of bullets on anyone that crosses the Sabres.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EndZoneCrew Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 Joe...your nonsense gives me a headache...by your logic..Rip Simoneck should be packing some heat and unload a flurry of bullets on anyone that crosses the Sabres.... 874914[/snapback] Who is Joe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taterhill Posted December 22, 2006 Share Posted December 22, 2006 Who is Joe? 874916[/snapback] Joe Six Pack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts