If Dominik Hasek's career would have been 10 years earlier in Buffalo

[reckoning]

I remember Hasek playing quite well in 87 against Canada (didn't we tie?).

The round-robin game was a 4-4 tie. Hasek was named the Czechs player of the game, and deservedly so. Defence was non-existent in the game, and Canada had a ton of 2-on-1 breaks.

In the semi-final Canada beat the Czechs 5-3, but for awhile it looked like Hasek was going to steal the game. At one point the announcer exclaimed "Hasek is killing us!" Czechoslovakia was up 2-0 midway through the second period before Canada finally broke through, then it just seemed like the onslaught was too much for him.

There's two main memories I have of Hasek from that tourney. One was a play where Messier had the puck a few feet in front of the crease, and Hasek just leapt forward and grabbed it off his stick before he could get a shot off. The other was a ridiculous dive he took in the semi-final. The Czechs had regained possession of the puck in their end and were moving it up ice. Claude Lemieux was trailing everybody, and as he passed Hasek he shoved him in the face with his glove. It was a typical jerk Claude Lemieux thing to do, but certainly didn't look like anything worse than a gentle shove. Hasek dropped to the ice like he'd been knocked unconscious.

 

[The Panther]

The other was a ridiculous dive he took in the semi-final. The Czechs had regained possession of the puck in their end and were moving it up ice. Claude Lemieux was trailing everybody, and as he passed Hasek he shoved him in the face with his glove. It was a typical jerk Claude Lemieux thing to do, but certainly didn't look like anything worse than a gentle shove. Hasek dropped to the ice like he'd been knocked unconscious.

Don't know if I'd call it a "ridiculous dive"! He took a pretty good shot.

No penalty, by the way (I love when the kids now think the refereeing today is poor).

 

[Theokritos]

I'm just trying to figure out what it was that sparked him from being a mediocre backup, .890 type goalie, to a .930 perennial Vezina winner in one season.

Not sure "mediocre" is fair. For starters, he was the backup to no other than Ed Belfour who was voted best goaltender in 1990-91 and #3/4 in the season afterwards. Belfour's SV% in his Vezina season was .910, Hašek's in the same season was .914 (the sample size is small though with only 5 games played). The season afterwards, Belfour was still considered one of the top goaltenders in the league with a SV% of .894 while Hašek's SV% that season was .893. In other words, Hašek matched up well with one of the best NHL goalies.

The problem is that in Chicago Hasek couldn't even beat out Jimmy Waite when Belfour was holding out.

He couldn't beat out Jimmy Waite for the job. But performance-wise? Let's take a closer look.

When Hašek comes over to North America in 1990 at the age of 25, he has three Czechoslovak Golden Sticks and three World Championship All-star honours under his belt. His Izvestia Golden Stick finishes make him look like the best European goaltender since Vladislav Tretyak. He's an established star in Europe and comes over with the respective confidence. In the preaseason, he makes a strong impression in the Blackhawks training camp. He gets to play in five NHL games for Chicago and stops 85 out of 93 shots on his goal. Then he is sent down to the Indianapolis Ice in the IHL. Hašek is disappointed. According to his agent Rich Winter: "If he'd have had a bad training camp, he could have easily handled going to the minors. But if he wasn't the best in preseason, he was one of the best. So he's confused he's not here... He still feels he's the best goaltender in the world. His confidence isn't shaken." Hašek's own take: "I'm as good as Ron Hextall and Grant Fuhr. They just don't know it yet."

In Indianapolis, Jimmy Waite is the reigning IHL All-star goaltender. Hašek outplays Waite by far (2.52 GAA vs 3.47 GAA) and tops the IHL in the statistic metrics. Lowest GAA (the 2nd best goaltender, future NHLer Guy Hebert, is at 2.87, everyone else has 3.26 or worse), most shutouts, SV% .915 (source). He is voted IHL All-star goaltender. After the regular season, he is called up to Chicago as back-up for Ed Belfour in the Stanley Cup playoffs. He gets to play in three games and stops 36 out of 39 shots for a SV% of 0.923 (Vezina winner Belfour has 0.891 in six playoff games).

And yet, he finds himself as #2 behind Jimmy Waite in Chicago when Ed Belfour holds out for a better contract in October 1991. Now, is that an argument against Hašek or against the Chicago Blackhawks? Personally, I don't believe in the wisdom and infallibility of NHL coaches enough to be convinced it's the former. Hašek, as his head coach Mike Keenan put it, "was just learning to speak English and had this crazy style" he wasn't willing to adapt. It went against everything in the hockey goaltending 101. "Dypsomaniacal triangulations & just pure stunts" and an "absolute freak show", to quote Killion. It's the same crazy style he went on to win his Vezina trophies with.

By the way, here are the Blackhawks' goalie SV% that season (1991-1992):

Belfour .894
Hašek .893
Waite .844

Judge for yourself.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Communications

Not sure "mediocre" is fair. For starters, he was the backup to no other than Ed Belfour who was voted best goaltender in 1990-91 and #3/4 in the season afterwards. Belfour's SV% in his Vezina season was .910, Hašek's in the same season was 0.914 (the sample size is small though with only 5 games played). The season afterwards, Belfour was still considered one of the top goaltenders in the league with a SV% of .894 while Hašek's SV% that season was .893. In other words, Hašek matched up well with one of the best NHL goalies.



He couldn't beat out Jimmy Waite for the job. But performance-wise? Let's take a closer look.

When Hašek comes over to North America in 1990 at the age of 25, he has three Czechoslovak Golden Sticks and three World Championship All-star honours under his belt. His Izvestia Golden Stick finishes make him look like the best European goaltender since Vladislav Tretyak. He's an established star in Europe and comes over with the respective confidence. In the preaseason, he makes a strong impression in the Blackhawks training camp. He gets to play in five NHL games for Chicago and stops 85 out of 93 shots on his goal. Then he is sent down to the Indianapolis Ice in the IHL. Hašek is disappointed. According to his agent Rich Winter: "If he'd have had a bad training camp, he could have easily handled going to the minors. But if he wasn't the best in preseason, he was one of the best. So he's confused he's not here... He still feels he's the best goaltender in the world. His confidence isn't shaken." Hašek's own take: "I'm as good as Ron Hextall and Grant Fuhr. They just don't know it yet."

In Indianapolis, Jimmy Waite is the reigning IHL All-star goaltender. Hašek outplays Waite by far (2.52 GAA vs 3.47 GAA) and tops the IHL in the statistic metrics. Lowest GAA (the 2nd best goaltender, future NHLer Guy Hebert, is at 2.87, everyone else has 3.26 or worse), most shutouts, SV% .915 (source). He is voted IHL All-star goaltender. After the regular season, he is called up to Chicago as back-up for Ed Belfour in the Stanley Cup playoffs. He gets to play in three games and stops 36 out of 39 shots for a SV% of 0.923 (Vezina winner Belfour has 0.891 in six playoff games).

And yet, he finds himself as #2 behind Jimmy Waite in Chicago when Ed Belfour holds out for a better contract in October 1991. Now, is that an argument against Hašek or against the Chicago Blackhawks? Personally, I don't believe in the wisdom and infallibility of NHL coaches enough to be convinced it's the former. Hašek, as his head coach Mike Keenan put it, "was just learning to speak English and had this crazy style" he wasn't willing to adapt. It went against everything in the hockey goaltending 101. "Dypsomaniacal triangulations & just pure stunts" and an "absolute freak show", to quote Killion. It's the same crazy style he went on to win his Vezina trophies with.

By the way, here are the Blackhawks' goalie SV% that season (1991-1992):

Belfour .894
Hašek .893
Waite .844

Judge for yourself.

Perhaps we have our answer in the bolded. How were his communication and zone management skills? Goaltending is more than SV% and GAA.

Jimmy Waite even at Midget AAA in Magog had the additional skills.

 

[threetimer*]

Not sure "mediocre" is fair. For starters, he was the backup to no other than Ed Belfour who was voted best goaltender in 1990-91 and #3/4 in the season afterwards. Belfour's SV% in his Vezina season was .910, Hašek's in the same season was 0.914 (the sample size is small though with only 5 games played). The season afterwards, Belfour was still considered one of the top goaltenders in the league with a SV% of .894 while Hašek's SV% that season was .893. In other words, Hašek matched up well with one of the best NHL goalies.



He couldn't beat out Jimmy Waite for the job. But performance-wise? Let's take a closer look.

When Hašek comes over to North America in 1990 at the age of 25, he has three Czechoslovak Golden Sticks and three World Championship All-star honours under his belt. His Izvestia Golden Stick finishes make him look like the best European goaltender since Vladislav Tretyak. He's an established star in Europe and comes over with the respective confidence. In the preaseason, he makes a strong impression in the Blackhawks training camp. He gets to play in five NHL games for Chicago and stops 85 out of 93 shots on his goal. Then he is sent down to the Indianapolis Ice in the IHL. Hašek is disappointed. According to his agent Rich Winter: "If he'd have had a bad training camp, he could have easily handled going to the minors. But if he wasn't the best in preseason, he was one of the best. So he's confused he's not here... He still feels he's the best goaltender in the world. His confidence isn't shaken." Hašek's own take: "I'm as good as Ron Hextall and Grant Fuhr. They just don't know it yet."

In Indianapolis, Jimmy Waite is the reigning IHL All-star goaltender. Hašek outplays Waite by far (2.52 GAA vs 3.47 GAA) and tops the IHL in the statistic metrics. Lowest GAA (the 2nd best goaltender, future NHLer Guy Hebert, is at 2.87, everyone else has 3.26 or worse), most shutouts, SV% .915 (source). He is voted IHL All-star goaltender. After the regular season, he is called up to Chicago as back-up for Ed Belfour in the Stanley Cup playoffs. He gets to play in three games and stops 36 out of 39 shots for a SV% of 0.923 (Vezina winner Belfour has 0.891 in six playoff games).

And yet, he finds himself as #2 behind Jimmy Waite in Chicago when Ed Belfour holds out for a better contract in October 1991. Now, is that an argument against Hašek or against the Chicago Blackhawks? Personally, I don't believe in the wisdom and infallibility of NHL coaches enough to be convinced it's the former. Hašek, as his head coach Mike Keenan put it, "was just learning to speak English and had this crazy style" he wasn't willing to adapt. It went against everything in the hockey goaltending 101. "Dypsomaniacal triangulations & just pure stunts" and an "absolute freak show", to quote Killion. It's the same crazy style he went on to win his Vezina trophies with.

By the way, here are the Blackhawks' goalie SV% that season (1991-1992):

Belfour .894
Hašek .893
Waite .844

Judge for yourself.

I have.

I'm so glad someone has done this. This should be stickied. Because the Hasek-couldn't-beat-out-Jimmy-Waite-for-the-job-let-alone-become-a-successful-starter theorists who basically reiterate Mike Keenan '91 will creep out again -- soon enough.

These threads and some of the answers would make more sense had Hasek only remained with his European resume, packing up and returning home... say in 1992. One has to be blind by choice not to see that this indeed was a case of the league giving the cold shoulder to someone who was a bit different.

I doubt Hasek still needed to be polished by 1991 or 1992. I think what he needed was a psycho willing to take a chance with him. Keenan was a renowned psycho, but not the sort Hasek needed.

I'm pretty sure that Hasek would have found the way to make it in the NHL even during the 80s. How big? Don't know about that, but his wobbly CC resume is an overstated wobbly evidence of his supposed incompetence. A bit of butterfly chased by the dreamers who could definitely do with no Hasek whatsover in their own preferred sub-reality.

 

[VanIslander]

Chicago's goalie coach was Tretiak, who said in an interview that he could teach Belfour but he couldn't help Hasek because Dom didn't do anything that he was trying to teach.

I remember that vividly. The tape was re-played several times in the media during the subsequent Hasek Vezina years in Buffalo. Does anyone have a link?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Distinction

Chicago's goalie coach was Tretiak, who said in an interview that he could teach Belfour but he couldn't help Hasek because Dom didn't do anything that he was trying to teach.

I remember that vividly. The tape was re-played several times in the media during the subsequent Hasek Vezina years in Buffalo. Does anyone have a link?

Distinction between didn't - couldn't - wouldn't comes into play.

 

[quoipourquoi]

And yet, he finds himself as #2 behind Jimmy Waite in Chicago when Ed Belfour holds out for a better contract in October 1991. Now, is that an argument against Hašek or against the Chicago Blackhawks?

Well he stopped just 59 of 69 while splitting the first two games with Jimmy Waite and just 67 of 82 in the final three games of the Canada Cup when a single win would have clinched a playoff. Let's not absolve him completely for a blown opportunity to become a starting goaltender a year earlier than he did.

 

[threetimer*]

Well he stopped just 59 of 69 while splitting the first two games with Jimmy Waite and just 67 of 82 in the final three games of the Canada Cup when a single win would have clinched a playoff. Let's not absolve him completely for a blown opportunity to become a starting goaltender a year earlier than he did.

The Czechs played 5 games total at the CC 1991.

1. Against the Soviet Union.

Hasek managed to shut out the Soviets till the 49th minute. In the end, the Czechoslovakia won 5:2.

2. Against Finland

Hasek managed to shut out the Finns completely. The only player who scored on him was Rucinsky (a Czech).

Czechoslovakia lost that game 0:1 and things began going downhill right there.

3. USA

Czechoslovakia as a team were helpless, unable to cope with American physicality. By the time they managed to score, they were down by 2 already. 4:2 for Americans.

4. Canada

Czechoslovakia got their first shot on goal after ten whole minutes of play. By then, they were down by 3. By the 11th minute, Fleury scored the fourth. 6:2 doesn't sound that bad anymore, does it.

5. Sweden

The game is tied at 2:2 until a Czechoslovak Jergus Baca sends Mats Sundin on a breakaway with a bad pass to give the Swedes the lead. 5:2 for Sweden in the end.

---

It doesn't sound like Hasek blowing it. It sounds like Czechs with a new coach (Hlinka) and right before the split of Czechoslovakia not having their act together.

But whatever, huh?

If this big Czechoslovakian wipe out is the reason Hasek ended in Indianapolis again, you may as well ask whether or not the people who decided these things were a bit... thick.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Veteran

The Czechs played 5 games total at the CC 1991.

1. Against the Soviet Union.

Hasek managed to shut out the Soviets till the 49th minute. In the end, the Czechoslovakia won 5:2.

2. Against Finland

Hasek managed to shut out the Finns completely. The only player who scored on him was Rucinsky (a Czech).

Czechoslovakia lost that game 0:1 and things began going downhill right there.

3. USA

Czechoslovakia as a team were helpless, unable to cope with American physicality. By the time they managed to score, they were down by 2 already. 4:2 for Americans.

4. Canada

Czechoslovakia got their first shot on goal after ten whole minutes of play. By then, they were down by 3. By the 11th minute, Fleury scored the fourth. 6:2 doesn't sound that bad anymore, does it.

5. Sweden

The game is tied at 2:2 until a Czechoslovak Jergus Baca sends Mats Sundin on a breakaway with a bad pass to give the Swedes the lead. 5:2 for Sweden in the end.

---

It doesn't sound like Hasek blowing it. It sounds like Czechs with a new coach (Hlinka) and right before the split of Czechoslovakia not having their act together.

But whatever, huh?

If this big Czechoslovakian wipe out is the reason Hasek ended in Indianapolis again, you may as well ask whether or not the people who decided these things were a bit... thick.

Hasek was a national team veteran. Usually veterans bring a team together under a new coach or in difficult times. Either in the dressing room or on the ice.

Show us where or when during his career Hasek had these traits.

 

[VanIslander]

19-year-old Hasek pokechecking Larionov in the 1984 Canada Cup.

This thread asks us to imagine him bypassing the Iron Curtain then.

It's like asking us to imagine Johnny Bower joining the NHL a decade before he did as a 29 year old (Heck, Punch Imlach had to threaten Bower's AHL career for him to agree to enter the NHL, as, remember, back then salaries weren't so much greater in the NHL).

Or imagine a Ken Dryden playing on for a decade after his early retirement to enter politics.

Not every all-time great goalie has played in the NHL for their entire prime, for 18+ years from a teenager to late thirties like Patrick Roy.

 

[threetimer*]

Hasek was a national team veteran. Usually veterans bring a team together under a new coach or in difficult times. Either in the dressing room or on the ice.

Show us where or when during his career Hasek had these traits.

Oh I'm sure that had he been the sort of veteran Canadiens1958 digs, he would have stopped the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, but some people would still find some sticky gooey something to throw at him. Just for the sake of throwing, with no respect to the gist of debate.

It's true he should have told Rucinsky "don't score on me, will you?"

He should have told the team "just freaking doooo something, will you?" against the USA and Canada.

And he should have told Jergus "do not, I repeat, do not pass the goddamn puck to Mats Sundin!"

He, the Dude from Indianapolis, should have told all those spoiled brats (Reichel and Jagr) to play some decent hockey.

For all we (don't) know, it's quite possible he did.

But you would still bring up something, anything. To seemingly justify his bus ticket to... Indianapolis.

 

[Doctor No]

Hasek was a national team veteran. Usually veterans bring a team together under a new coach or in difficult times. Either in the dressing room or on the ice.

Show us where or when during his career Hasek had these traits.

Surely you realize that sometimes teams "come together" but still aren't good enough to beat a superior opponent?

What happens if both teams have veterans who "bring their team together"?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Exactly

Surely you realize that sometimes teams "come together" but still aren't good enough to beat a superior opponent?

What happens if both teams have veterans who "bring their team together"?

Exactly, then you have better competition, since the compete level rises on both sides.

Example Vladimir Dzurilla in the 1976 Canada Cup.

 

[SatanwasaSlovak]

The Sabres were a really strong defensive team with Hasek. Steve Shields did good with the Sabres aswell, when Hasek was gone in the 96/97 playoffs.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Not sure "mediocre" is fair. For starters, he was the backup to no other than Ed Belfour who was voted best goaltender in 1990-91 and #3/4 in the season afterwards. Belfour's SV% in his Vezina season was .910, Hašek's in the same season was .914 (the sample size is small though with only 5 games played). The season afterwards, Belfour was still considered one of the top goaltenders in the league with a SV% of .894 while Hašek's SV% that season was .893. In other words, Hašek matched up well with one of the best NHL goalies.

That's fair. >.900 Save percentages have become so ingrained in my mind that sometimes I have a hard time seeing a .893 and thinking "not bad". Kind of like I have a hard time seeing current forwards putting up 30 points and thinking "hmmm, that's useful".

Still though, jumping from consistently sub-.900 to consistently hitting .930 is an incredible leap. There must be more to it than "he got a chance to shine", right? There had to have been some sort of material change in the way he played, to suddenly just blow up like that.

 

[Cruor]

You guys seem to guess an awful lot about Hasek, here is some of it in his own words:



At around 3:50 he details his experience coming over and having to play in the IHL, and the effect it had on him. I'm more than convinced that had he come over earlier he would also have adjusted earlier.

 

[Theokritos]

Still though, jumping from consistently sub-.900 to consistently hitting .930 is an incredible leap. There must be more to it than "he got a chance to shine", right? There had to have been some sort of material change in the way he played, to suddenly just blow up like that.

One thing to keep in mind is that the numbers generally went up across the league. Top 3 SV% by goaltenders who played at least 20 games:

Season | Top 3 SV% | Difference
1986-87:|.902, .894, .894
1987-88:|.900, .898, .896|+0.04
1988-89:|.908, .900, .898|+0.12
1989-90:|.912, .905, .904|+0.15
1990-91:|.910, .906, .903|-0.02
1991-92:|.914, .910, .910|+0.15
1992-93:|.911, .910, .906|-0.07
1993-94: | .930, .924, .918 | +0.43
1994-95:|.930, .915, .914|-0.15
1995-96:|.920, .918, .916|-0.05

Something changed across the board and whatever it was, it looks like it would have boosted Hašek's SV% from .896 to maybe .910 anyway. But the rest, from .910 to .930, is an individual boost exclusive to Hašek, so that's still in need of an explanation.

 

[angrymnky]

I thought I read somewhere that Hasek never really had a goalie coach that worked with him to improve his game (and not by changing his style) until he got to Buffalo.

 

[tarheelhockey]

One thing to keep in mind is that the numbers generally went up across the league. Top 3 SV% by goaltenders who played at least 20 games:

Just a nitpick, but Hasek himself is driving those 1994+ numbers because he surged so extraordinarily far ahead of the pack.

Removing Hasek, the numbers are:

Season | Top 3 SV% | Difference
1986-87:|.902, .894, .894
1987-88:|.900, .898, .896|+0.04
1988-89:|.908, .900, .898|+0.12
1989-90:|.912, .905, .904|+0.15
1990-91:|.910, .906, .903|-0.02
1991-92:|.914, .910, .910|+0.15
1992-93:|.911, .910, .906|-0.07
1993-94:|.924, .918, .915|+0.30
1994-95:|.915, .914, .913|-0.15
1995-96:|.918, .916, .914|+0.06

Not a big difference with regards to the greater point, but it shaves about a third off that 1994 boost.

Either way, though, it does indeed seem that something rather unusual happened among top-level goalies in '94. I had no idea that the difference was that stark. Hasek's personal boost, while still remarkable, seems less... supernatural when looking at it against that global trend.

 

[Zegras Zebra]

Hypothetically if Hasek had come over in the 1982-83 season and played for the Buffalo Sabres as mentioned in the OP, then I think he would have beaten out Barrasso for the starters job, and would have been a Vezina candidate for most of the 1980's. However, I do not think that Hasek would be such a big improvement over Barrasso to move the Sabres to legitimate Cup contenders with the Oilers, Flames, Canadiens, Flyers, etc. at that time. Its possible Hasek could have had a run similar to his later 1999 Stanley Cup Final run at some point during the 1980's, but I can't see the Sabres getting by the Oilers or Flames in the Stanley Cup Final during that era. I do think if Hasek had come over earlier, he would be considered the undisputed greatest goaltender of all time instead of it being a debate between him Roy, and maybe a small list of other goalies.

 

[Theokritos]

Well he stopped just 59 of 69 while splitting the first two games with Jimmy Waite and just 67 of 82 in the final three games of the Canada Cup when a single win would have clinched a playoff. Let's not absolve him completely for a blown opportunity to become a starting goaltender a year earlier than he did.

Based on the 1990-1991 season, one would think Hašek had already earned the starting spot for the time being (with Belfour not signed yet) over Jimmy Waite. With the record in mind (2.52 GAA vs 3.47 GAA in the IHL), the question is why Waite even started in the first game and Hašek sat on the bench.

Still you're right, we cannot "absolve him completely" for missing that opportunity. But let's also not overlook what constitutes this "blown opportunity": two regular season games in October 1991 (in contrast to the 1990-91 season when Hašek blew Waite out of the water over an entire year). In these two games Hašek had a SV% of .855 and Waite had .863 – that was the blown opportunity. Hašek sat for the next seven games and Waite started. Does that make a lot of sense to you, even if you disregard our knowledge of what Hašek achieved later?

 

[quoipourquoi]

Still you're right, we cannot "absolve him completely" for missing that opportunity. But let's also not overlook what constitutes this "blown opportunity": two regular season games in October 1991 (in contrast to the 1990-91 season when Hašek blew Waite out of the water over an entire year). In these two games Hašek had a SV% of .855 and Waite had .863 – that was the blown opportunity. Hašek sat for the next seven games and Waite started. Does that make a lot of sense to you, even if you disregard our knowledge of what Hašek achieved later?

I don't think pointing out that Waite was also bad when they were splitting the opening four games does Hasek any favors, because it just shows us how low the threshold was to become Chicago's starting goaltender in October 1991. So if you're Mike Keenan and you've watched Hasek in the 1991 Canada Cup (6 goals on 36 shots) and you've watched him against Minnesota and Vancouver, when Waite's next three games are 25/27, 28/31, and 18/20, you can re-visit the rotation because Hasek was good in the IHL the year before and a Canada Cup four years prior, or you can ride it out with Waite for a bit.

Either way, Belfour is coming back to the team, because Hasek missed the opportunity in 1991 that he capitalized on when Fuhr got hurt two years later. So when people talk about how Chicago didn't give him a shot or that there was an eagle-sized roadblock, I have to disagree. He played for the starting role both years and didn't get it. So why would he be any better throughout the 1980s than Belfour was in 1988-89 when he had his trial run as Chicago's starter for 5 weeks? And if he were in Buffalo, what are the odds he's not behind Barrasso just as he was behind Belfour and Waite?

 

[Theokritos]

I don't think pointing out that Waite was also bad when they were splitting the opening four games does Hasek any favors, because it just shows us how low the threshold was to become Chicago's starting goaltender in October 1991. (...) So when people talk about how Chicago didn't give him a shot or that there was an eagle-sized roadblock, I have to disagree. He played for the starting role both years and didn't get it.

For the record, I'm not making a positive claim here that Hašek wasn't given a shot or that he was good enough to be the starter. Do I suspect it to be the case? Yes, but I acknowledge I'm not in the position to make a definite statement.

What makes me suspicious is their decision to let Waite split the first four games with Hašek and then let Hašek sit for the next seven games after that 1990-91 season. If you consider the circumstantial evidence we have (the remarks on Hašek's style by various observers, including his head coach Keenan and his goaltending coach Tretyak), then it seems very likely, at least to me, that the Chicago coaching staff was worried Hašek's goaltending style wouldn't be sustainable over an NHL season, and that they were unhappy he wasn't willing to adapt his style. Their worries, by the way, were not unreasonable at all at that point in time, as Hašek's "dypsomaniacal triangulations and pure stunts" did indeed run contrary to all lessons and experience in the entire history of professional hockey goaltending.

Did Hašek blew his opportunity to become a starter in 1990 and in 1991? If we consider the outlier character of the subsequent success Hašek had in the NHL with his "crazy" style, then I'm really not sure that would be an adequate description of what happened in 90 and 91 in Chicago. Mind you, I'm not blaming the Blackhawks staff as much as pointing out the historic circumstances and the uniqueness of the goaltender we're talking about.

 

[quoipourquoi]

What makes me suspicious is their decision to let Waite split the first four games with Hašek and then let Hašek sit for the next seven games after that 1990-91 season.

Look at the sequence:

Waite - 25/28
Hasek - 31/35
Waite - 19/23
Hasek - 28/34
Waite - 25/27
Waite - 28/31
Waite - 18/20

The rotation stopped when Waite had a strong game, and another, and another. Then when Waite had a 5 GA game six starts later, Hasek got the next start, had a good game, started the next game, and was gone by the 1st period.

Waite - 13/18
Hasek - 24/26
Hasek - 7/10

Hasek's statistics recovered for the season based on his performance when he came back in January 1992, but 90 saves on 105 shots while Belfour is out doesn't leave me suspicious at all about why he didn't become Chicago's starter. Waite played his way out of the rotation and then played his way back into it. Hasek got back-to-back starts days before Belfour signed and then shanked the second start.

It makes for a nice hypothetical if Hasek could have established himself sooner, but the opportunities afforded to him in his first three seasons could have been capitalized on by better performances - or in the case of 1992-93, not being hurt. That they weren't makes me much more suspicious as to whether he was really any better pre-1990 than, say, Ed Belfour. We ask how he suddenly became the best goaltender in the world in 1994, but we could just as easily ask how did he go from being the best goaltender not in the NHL in the 1980s to being worse than Ed Belfour, who was also not in the NHL.

But given 1990-91 through 1992-93, I don't see a consistent Vezina contender who could have made a difference for 1980s Buffalo. Probably just someone who could push Barrasso into a tandem.