Ramsey05 Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 The Anti-Slug force seems to be losing members daily, and with a Stanley Cup Banner with a giant slug on it, your numbers may join the ranks of supporters of the cooper-alls WE ARE LEGION! GO SLUG GO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Peters would be OK...if they let him be Peters. Not to re-open the Peters debate, but what does that mean, let Peters be Peters? Sit on the bench for 58 of the 60 minutes? Check. Provide nothing offensively or defensively? Check. Fight once every three or four games, against the other team's designated tough guy? Check. Deter opponents from taking cheap shots at Sabres? Ummm... nope. I hate to sound like DeLuca, but aside from a couple fights that arguably sparked the team to better play and thus a victory this year, what else has he done? Thaaaaanks....Now when the inevitable rash of injuries strikes, I'll know whose ass to kick. :P Yeah, I'm worried. If this team sees a rash of injuries like they did last year, then there is something else at work aside from the hockey gods messing with us. If we see a return of the M.A.S.H. unit from last year's playoffs, LQ and Tommy G should hire priests, voodoo witch doctors, psychics and shaman and even request the Pope come over and bless the players, coaches, ice, dressing rooms, parking lots- hell, even the slug logos everywhere - because there is something sinister afoot. And if you still want someone to "talk to," don't worry - I am not going anywhere... :nana: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsey05 Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 I hate to sound like DeLuca, but aside from a couple fights that arguably sparked the team to better play and thus a victory this year, what else has he done? Hey, the guy brings energy. And what does he actually cost? Nothing. Yeah, I'm worried. If this team sees a rash of injuries like they did last year, then there is something else at work aside from the hockey gods messing with us. If we see a return of the M.A.S.H. unit from last year's playoffs, LQ and Tommy G should hire priests, voodoo witch doctors, psychics and shaman and even request the Pope come over and bless the players, coaches, ice, dressing rooms, parking lots- hell, even the slug logos everywhere - because there is something sinister afoot. And if you still want someone to "talk to," don't worry - I am not going anywhere... :nana: :thumbsup: Like the voodo priest idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Might not be a bad idea, actually - maybe get proactive this year instead of waiting to see if/when the injury shoe drops... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Not to re-open the Peters debate, but what does that mean, let Peters be Peters? Sit on the bench for 58 of the 60 minutes? Check. Provide nothing offensively or defensively? Check. Fight once every three or four games, against the other team's designated tough guy? Check. Deter opponents from taking cheap shots at Sabres? Ummm... nope. I hate to sound like DeLuca, but aside from a couple fights that arguably sparked the team to better play and thus a victory this year, what else has he done? Yeah, I'm worried. If this team sees a rash of injuries like they did last year, then there is something else at work aside from the hockey gods messing with us. If we see a return of the M.A.S.H. unit from last year's playoffs, LQ and Tommy G should hire priests, voodoo witch doctors, psychics and shaman and even request the Pope come over and bless the players, coaches, ice, dressing rooms, parking lots- hell, even the slug logos everywhere - because there is something sinister afoot. And if you still want someone to "talk to," don't worry - I am not going anywhere... :nana: See, a perfectly good thread killed by yet another meaningless Peters debate. Let's agree to let it go. When you watch Peters, feel free to shake your head, swear under breath, slap your forehead. But refrain, at all costs, from posting yet another anti-Peters thread on the board. We get it, the guy plays two minutes a game. He'd be equally effective playing with a broom instead of a stick. Most of his fights look like slap contests. But for some weird reason, Lindy 'Jack-Adams' Ruff keeps putting him into the lineup. And his teammates (who have 61 points on January 1st on the highest-scoring team in the league) like him. Let's just agree to disagree with the coach who set the franchise record for points and wins last year, and is on pace to break it this year, and leave the rest unsaid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Ruff seems to like him, his salary is managable for the salary cap, and with the rising cost of the current players salaries, its going to get harder to keep them all and fit it under the cap, he may be around longer then you think Not to turn this into an ABP debate, but does Ruff like him or is Ruff working with the hand that Darcy dealt to him? Also, it's only my opinion, but I don't think there is a snowballs chance in hell that Peters is in the Sabres organization come next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 And conversely, perhaps we can stop threads asking why the hell is Peters still here. The argument has been made against him, and Ruff isn't listening. We'll call this one, the 'beating a dead horse' law. Or we could just add "Because Lindy's smarter than all of us combined." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Two more proposed laws... #1 It is possible to support the team and still hate the slug! :nana: #2 Thou shall not question Dave_B when it comes to the CBA! :worthy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Two more proposed laws... #1 It is possible to support the team and still hate the slug! :nana: #2 Thou shall not question Dave_B when it comes to the CBA! :worthy: I second #2 As for #1, we could add a Peters/Slug Logo law as just a no beating a dead horse law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Not to turn this into an ABP debate, but does Ruff like him or is Ruff working with the hand that Darcy dealt to him? Also, it's only my opinion, but I don't think there is a snowballs chance in hell that Peters is in the Sabres organization come next year. I think he likes him well enough for the 20th roster spot on a team that leads the league in scoring and is comfortably in first place in the Conference. Paille and Peters are pretty close salary wise, so I doubt Darcy would be adverse to dumping Peters in favor of Paille. Conversely, if the Sabres were only averaging 2 goals a game and were fighting for the eighth spot in the conference, I'd think Lindy's opinion of Peters would be different. I haven't heard Lindy even come close to suggesting that the team needs more scoring from the fourth line this year. They're space-fillers that are used to jam up the other team during the first and second periods. To his credit, Peters is not a minus player (he's even :D ), so I doubt Ruff believes he's hurting the team as much as the fans believe he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Paille and Peters are pretty close salary wise, so I doubt Darcy would be adverse to dumping Peters in favor of Paille. It is my understanding that they don't have the salary cap dollars to do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 My proposed law...No defending Peters roster spot on this team at any time. This is also known as the APB(Anyone But Peters) law. Why don't we just propose a law banning all Sabre debate?... We can all just sit here and stare at a blank screen... Or maybe I can propose a "if anything annoys me law"... That means, if anything annoys me... It is said to be banned and said "infractor" knows jack sch*t about hockey and "how" the game should be played... And yes, I am only kidding... :nana: :nana: :nana: Anyway, I like Martin Havalat... He is God to me now that he is playing on the 'Hawks... But, come Jan. 10th, that will change for a night... :D I do agree that stupid player (not by said player) screen names be outlawed... In MHIMG's defense, he did ask to have it changed a while back... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 It is my understanding that they don't have the salary cap dollars to do this. If that's true, and Peters is here only because of the cap, then it really is a meaningless issue to debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 If that's true, and Peters is here only because of the cap, then it really is a meaningless issue to debate. I'm probably off on the exact figures, but I believe Peters is making $500,000 while Paille in the NHL makes $700,000 so with the Sabres close to the cap, it would be really hard to exchange the 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 If that's true, and Peters is here only because of the cap, then it really is a meaningless issue to debate. I thought Peters was here because Lindy likes him? ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bmwolf21 Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Honestly, jad, that's what I believe - that the main reason Peters is still on the team and dressing as often as he does is due to the salary cap constrictions. Unless the Sabres make a move or two to free up some salary cap $$ and can bring up guys like Paille & Stafford on an extended basis, we'll never know the answer to that. Just for the record, I am not anti-Peters. I just don't like that we are stuck with him in the lineup when we have guys like Paille, Stafford, Ryan, etc waiting in the wings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Just for the record, I am not anti-Peters. I just don't like that we are stuck with him in the lineup when we have guys like Paille, Stafford, Ryan, etc waiting in the wings. I'll go on record with that too. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted January 2, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Made a few updates to the "laws". Still looking for input about how many votes=SabreSpace Law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad1 Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Honestly, jad, that's what I believe - that the main reason Peters is still on the team and dressing as often as he does is due to the salary cap constrictions. Unless the Sabres make a move or two to free up some salary cap $$ and can bring up guys like Paille & Stafford on an extended basis, we'll never know the answer to that. Just for the record, I am not anti-Peters. I just don't like that we are stuck with him in the lineup when we have guys like Paille, Stafford, Ryan, etc waiting in the wings. Keep in mind that the cap factors factors that keep Peters in the lineup have also contributed to the Sabres current record. It would be great to see these young guys in the lineup, but it's hard to argue that keeping them in Rochester has hurt the team so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Made a few updates to the "laws". Still looking for input about how many votes=SabreSpace Law. Looking good but I think #4 should just be changed to No Beating a dead horse (it makes the laws broader to cover more then just small topics) I think they only need a second to be put on the list as a potential and then a day or 2 of discussion time to clarify how the law should be written and what it will cover (i.e No Beating a Dead Horse will cover all topics discussing Peters value/lack of to the team and Discussions on the logo) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Just a reminder to some posting in this thread. This was part of inkman's initial post.... Please, this thread is only a poor attempt at humor and do not take any of this #%^$#! seriously! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blugold43 Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 how about this one: no threads about "board culture." ;) (i say this as i have furiously scrolled through 3 pages :thumbsup: ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 how about this one: no threads about "board culture." ;) (i say this as i have furiously scrolled through 3 pages :thumbsup: ) I second that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted January 2, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 I think you're onto something. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deluca67 Posted January 2, 2007 Report Share Posted January 2, 2007 Keep in mind that the cap factors factors that keep Peters in the lineup have also contributed to the Sabres current record. It would be great to see these young guys in the lineup, but it's hard to argue that keeping them in Rochester has hurt the team so far. It's never been about the regular season. Last years playoffs taught us all you can never have enough quality game ready players. Peters does not qualify. B-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.