Hasek was pretty awesome in 1993-94, eh?

Hobnobs

Pinko
Nov 29, 2011
8,863
2,236
if Sabres had surrounded Hasek with better players in 94 they probably wouldve gone all the way. Its a damn shame they didnt while they still had the money. No scoring depth and no real 1st pairing is just too shallow even with .950 Hasek in goal.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,773
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
if Sabres had surrounded Hasek with better players in 94 they probably wouldve gone all the way. Its a damn shame they didnt while they still had the money. No scoring depth and no real 1st pairing is just too shallow even with .950 Hasek in goal.

And which teams were going to give Buffalo such players for free?
 

Johnny Engine

Moderator
Jul 29, 2009
4,972
2,352
Where did I write teams should give them players? They could trade or sign better players.
Yeah, the amount of player moment in free agency and soft deals wasn't nearly as common as it is now.

In the realm of actual moves that affected the Sabres vis a vis scoring depth and first pairing defense:
- Losing Andreychuk (and a pick) in order to flip Fuhr and Puppa did not help their scoring depth. Had they known where Hasek was headed early on, they surely would not have done this.
- A year later, they flipped Fuhr in a multi-part deal that brought back the best defenseman they had all decade, Zhitnik. Could this have been done earlier?
- Traded Housley for Hawerchuk. Peter, meet Paul.

In 1992-93 and 1994, here are a few players who were moved around the league for either not much or something that wouldn't help on the ice:
- Sylvain Lefevbre (not really the top pair guy you're thinking of, but he'd help)
- Hasek (lol)
- John Cullen
- Ray Sheppard
- Jeff Norton (I'd rather have Lefevbre, but he could help too)
- Fredrik Olausson (again...)

The scoring depth is... not exciting unless you're willing to up the ante for Dino Ciccarelli, who went for a solid everyday forward in Kevin Miller. The only top-pair defensemen who were really on the move was Housley, and then MacInnis the next season, for Housley again. That's not very much in the way of opportunity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canadiens1958

Hobnobs

Pinko
Nov 29, 2011
8,863
2,236
Yeah, the amount of player moment in free agency and soft deals wasn't nearly as common as it is now.

In the realm of actual moves that affected the Sabres vis a vis scoring depth and first pairing defense:
- Losing Andreychuk (and a pick) in order to flip Fuhr and Puppa did not help their scoring depth. Had they known where Hasek was headed early on, they surely would not have done this.
- A year later, they flipped Fuhr in a multi-part deal that brought back the best defenseman they had all decade, Zhitnik. Could this have been done earlier?
- Traded Housley for Hawerchuk. Peter, meet Paul.

In 1992-93 and 1994, here are a few players who were moved around the league for either not much or something that wouldn't help on the ice:
- Sylvain Lefevbre (not really the top pair guy you're thinking of, but he'd help)
- Hasek (lol)
- John Cullen
- Ray Sheppard
- Jeff Norton (I'd rather have Lefevbre, but he could help too)
- Fredrik Olausson (again...)

The scoring depth is... not exciting unless you're willing to up the ante for Dino Ciccarelli, who went for a solid everyday forward in Kevin Miller. The only top-pair defensemen who were really on the move was Housley, and then MacInnis the next season, for Housley again. That's not very much in the way of opportunity.

You're right that it isnt like now or how it became in 96 when trades and FAs started to pick up. But lets say they added a couple of players like Galley or Kravchuk and Lefevbre or McCrimmon. Already they look much improved. Now how cheap they wouldve been is obviously up for discussion.

As for top-6. Petr Nedved was a RFA that year I believe. I dont know if Sabres would have the pieces to sign him but its an idea. Plenty of second line forwards on non-playoff teams that year. Klima, former sabre John Tucker, Kevin Dineen, Stu Barnes, Kudelski, Gelinas, Troy Murray, Ulf Dahlen, Ysebeart, something.

The biggest problem was that Sabres did nothing at all. The only trade of any significance they did was early in the season they traded for Muni. Its just weird to me because Sabres were good that season. They didnt need that much to improve except on defense which I understand is hard to improve on.
 
Last edited:

Dingo

Registered User
Jul 13, 2018
1,724
1,678
Hasek on the sabres in the 90s was a lot like Barry Sanders on the Lions in the 90s.

Two centurational players playing with dogshit.
 

quoipourquoi

Goaltender
Jan 26, 2009
10,123
4,126
Hockeytown, MI
Losing Andreychuk (and a pick) in order to flip Fuhr and Puppa did not help their scoring depth. Had they known where Hasek was headed early on, they surely would not have done this.

Their hand was kinda forced because of Hasek’s long-term injury. They either had to rely on Draper and Puppa (who they had lost faith in after his own injury troubles) or make a move. Having allowed 43 GA in the 12 games since Hasek went down, they were probably worried they might be wasting their season if they didn’t find a goaltender right away.
 

reckoning

Registered User
Jan 4, 2005
7,012
1,251
The scary part was that Buffalo left Hasek unprotected in the expansion draft prior to that season. As it turned out, both Florida and Anaheim passed him over. Six goalies were selected in that draft: Vanbiesbrouck, Fitzpatrick, Puppa, Hebert, Healy and Tugnutt. Hasek wasn't one of them. The Sabres were really lucky (not a phrase you'll hear very often).
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrhockey193195

Normand Lacombe

Registered User
Jan 30, 2008
1,442
1,352
You're right that it isnt like now or how it became in 96 when trades and FAs started to pick up. But lets say they added a couple of players like Galley or Kravchuk and Lefevbre or McCrimmon. Already they look much improved. Now how cheap they wouldve been is obviously up for discussion.

As for top-6. Petr Nedved was a RFA that year I believe. I dont know if Sabres would have the pieces to sign him but its an idea. Plenty of second line forwards on non-playoff teams that year. Klima, former sabre John Tucker, Kevin Dineen, Stu Barnes, Kudelski, Gelinas, Troy Murray, Ulf Dahlen, Ysebeart, something.

The biggest problem was that Sabres did nothing at all. The only trade of any significance they did was early in the season they traded for Muni. Its just weird to me because Sabres were good that season. They didnt need that much to improve except on defense which I understand is hard to improve on.

Galley was acquired the next year for Petr Svoboda. Played two and half seasons in Buffalo. Another RFA in the summer of 1994 was Scott Stevens.
 

Hobnobs

Pinko
Nov 29, 2011
8,863
2,236
Galley was acquired the next year for Petr Svoboda. Played two and half seasons in Buffalo. Another RFA in the summer of 1994 was Scott Stevens.

Yea I know. Thats why I specifically mentioned him. Sabres had options but decided to stand pat despite having lost Lafontaine and Simpson for the rest of the season.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
None of those Sabres teams were defensive gems either. 1994 is no exception. I think if anything that season gets elevated because Lafontaine got hurt the whole year and in reality that should have been it. Hasek wasn't known as "Hasek" at that time, but 1994 is when it all started for him. I thought it was a great season. A lot of good goalie competition too that year. Roy, Beezer had a Hart-esque year, Brodeur with the Calder. It was definitely a peak year for a goalie and Hasek blew them out.
 

VanIslander

A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Sep 4, 2004
35,134
6,428
None of those Sabres teams were defensive gems either.
1. Buffalo did not have any great defensemen. Zhitnik could hit and shoot but his decision making was risky and hockey sense erratic, and Smehlik was highly underrated, but still no more than a 4/5 dman on any great team in hockey history.

2. In 1997 Hasek won his first Hart but had two key DEFENSIVE additions in petformance: Michael Peca won his first Selke trophy that year and coach Nolan the Jack Adams trophy. Cart and horse.

3. Hasek never needed elite dmen to shutdown scoring opportunities because Hasek thrived on facing shots and us fans would actually sigh in relief when he faced 15 shots in the opening period because if he faced only 3 or 4 then he often was less reliable later in games. He simply got better as games went on.

4. Hasek used to say he hated dmen that dropped to block shots: take away the pass or check the carrier or GET OUT OF THE WAY! And... clear the crease of rebounds afterwards. By no means screen, block or cause deflections.

5. One on one, Hasek took on anyone. Mario Lemieux, Pavel Bure, Eric Lindros, ... he took them all on confidently and successfully.

6. Buffalo played an aggressive forecheck game, 2-men deep, one dman pinching - in effect creating powerplay opportunities - and giving up an inordinate number of odd-man rushes against, but the one Sabre dman back simply checked the carrier quickly, to force a pass to the open guy for a one on one rush, or else took away the pass lane and let the carrier take on Hasek.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrhockey193195

vikash1987

Registered User
Mar 7, 2004
1,302
564
New York
3. Hasek never needed elite dmen to shutdown scoring opportunities because Hasek thrived on facing shots and us fans would actually sigh in relief when he faced 15 shots in the opening period because if he faced only 3 or 4 then he often was less reliable later in games. He simply got better as games went on.

Do we know what Hasek’s stats/record were in ‘93-‘94 (or, for that matter, all-time) for games in which he only faced a small number of shots in the 1st period, vs. games in which he faced a large number?

This was honestly something which got lost on a lot of fans when it came to analyzing Brodeur and other goalies from that era, who were actually the opposite, i.e. they were impressively reliable despite not facing a lot of rubber in opening periods.

4. Hasek used to say he hated dmen that dropped to block shots: take away the pass or check the carrier or GET OUT OF THE WAY! And... clear the crease of rebounds afterwards. By no means screen, block or cause deflections.

I recently re-watched Game 7 of the Sabres-Devils series from ‘94, and was reminded of Hasek getting visibly upset at and blaming his d-man Randy Moller for screening him on the tying goal. I seem to recall Hasek having this reaction a handful of times in his career when he was screened by his d-men, and it was always cringeworthy to watch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VanIslander

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->