Retiring numbers

[bottlecap]

The Boston Red Sox retired exactly five numbers in an entire

century.

 

Last night I was watching the Oilers retire Coffey's number.

A star-studded event with many Stanley Cup banners.

(an interesting sidebar: Scotty Bowman had a deal with

Glen Sather in '79 sending Rick Martin to the Oilers for

Paul Coffey. Right before they were about to agree, Sather

said 'he'll sleep on it...' Next morning, he changed his mind)

 

I was dazzled by Lafontaine and Mogilny. It would be a slam

dunk for Mogilny if it wasn't for his shameful behavior at the

end of his 3 year Sabres career, demanding to be traded by

purposefully missing breakaways. Very similar to the Dominator's

lousy behavior at the end.

 

Gare I'm not so sure about. He was a VG player who might

not even get into the HOF. Maybe he's already in, I'm not sure.

 

I think La-La and Gare are strictly PR moves.

 

Bottom line is the Sabres, as Harold Ballard once said, are

a nickel and dime organization who (in his opinion) will never

win the cup. Ironically, the Knoxes originally made their fortune

owning a chain of 5 & 10 stores! Our mis-management have turned

off all of our greatest players at the end.

 

If all truth be told Perreault, the Dominator and Ted Darling

should be the only retired 'numbers' until the Sabes start winning cups.

[Larry Playfair]

Mogilny? Put down the pipe zed.

[BetweenThePipes00]

Bottom line is the Sabres, as Harold Ballard once said, are

a nickel and dime organization ...

Like Ballard is one to talk. he nickel and dimed with the Leafs from a Cup winner to a laughingstock in the 1970s and they have never recovered. He said things like that because he was sick of getting his ass kicked by a team put together by a guy he fired. I've never heard anyone say a nice thing about the guy. The Knoxes were not perfect owners but they had 10 times the class of Ballard.

 

No doubt some of the retiring numbers has something to do with PR, but the new ownership is trying to connect with the fans and this is a good thing. Sure it would be nice if we had guys like Paul Coffey to honor and Stanley Cup banners, but we don't have that. It doesn't mean Gare and LaFontaine didn't mean something to the people of Buffalo while they were playing. maybe honoring them like the Bills do without actually retiring the numbers would be better, but that is a minor point, it's semantics.

 

We can't complain about the way the Rigases ran things and then turn around and also complain about the new guy trying to re-connect and respect the tradition. It used to be it meant something to put on the Blue and Gold, and guys like Gare established that pride. LaFontaine came later but he got it, he took pride in that jersey and the community. The young guys on the current team need to realize that the organization values the way these guys played the game and handled themselves as opposed to the way recent stars associated with the organization (Hasek, Satan) handled themselves. Not just because taking pride in those things can make you a better team, but yes, because of PR. If they sell more tickets, they have a better chance to compete for players and win more games. and yea, Golisano makes money. It is a business ... I can't help but get the feeling that some fans don't want to go back because the owner of the team might actually make money and for some reason this bothers them. Rigas burned us, yes, no doubt, but if fans don't get over it they might not have a team to root for some day.

[Kristian]

While Hasek is probably the best goalie to ever play the game, and he certainly was the best in Buffalo, a classless act such as he doesn't deserve having his number retired anywhere. Neither does Alex Mogilny.

 

On-ice merits only takes you so far, and Hasek quitting on the team against The Penguins the way he did will forever stand before his stellar play, at least in my mind.

 

IMHO, LaFontaine should've had his number retired years ago. He was injured a lot, but he also played through a lot of injuries, probably more than any of us will ever know about.

[shrader]

maybe honoring them like the Bills do without actually retiring the numbers would be better, but that is a minor point, it's semantics.

I don't see how it would be better. In football, you can't retire very many numbers because of the size of a roster. The Wall of Fame is really the only way you can show the respected deserved by former players. What's the big deal in hockey? The roster is much smaller so retiring a few isn't going to cause any problems.

[Taro T]

While Hasek is probably the best goalie to ever play the game, and he certainly was the best in Buffalo, a classless act such as he doesn't deserve having his number retired anywhere. Neither does Alex Mogilny.

 

On-ice merits only takes you so far, and Hasek quitting on the team against The Penguins the way he did will forever stand before his stellar play, at least in my mind.

 

IMHO, LaFontaine should've had his number retired years ago. He was injured a lot, but he also played through a lot of injuries, probably more than any of us will ever know about.

Yes, Hasek let in a bad shot against the Pens. My question to you is: if in fact he really did quit on the Sabres in that game, why did he wait until the 10th shot of OT to quit? He made at least 5 incredible saves in that OT. He could have let any one of those go in if he in fact actually quit. It makes no sense whatsoever to say he quit.

[Kristian]

Yes, Hasek let in a bad shot against the Pens. My question to you is: if in fact he really did quit on the Sabres in that game, why did he wait until the 10th shot of OT to quit? He made at least 5 incredible saves in that OT. He could have let any one of those go in if he in fact actually quit. It makes no sense whatsoever to say he quit.

Valid point, but Hasek was and is a basket case - who knows why he did anything?

 

Even if he didn't quit in that game, he shafted the organisation in the Detroit deal, and seemed to go out of his way to tick off the Buffalo fans while leaving. Those two things alone, IMHO at least, are good enough reasons to stick #39 on Biron forever :)

 

Also, I'm not aware of Hasek ever denying that he let that shot in on purpose? This is not say he hasn't done so, just that I'm not aware of it.

 

Seems a little weird, considering he got into a scuffle with Jim Kelly back in the day, over the infamous groin injury.

 

If he HAS in fact denied it, please disregard above.

[Taro T]

Valid point, but Hasek was and is a basket case - who knows why he did anything?

 

Even if he didn't quit in that game, he shafted the organisation in the Detroit deal, and seemed to go out of his way to tick off the Buffalo fans while leaving. Those two things alone, IMHO at least, are good enough reasons to stick #39 on Biron forever  :)

 

Also, I'm not aware of Hasek ever denying that he let that shot in on purpose? This is not say he hasn't done so, just that I'm not aware of it.

 

Seems a little weird, considering he got into a scuffle with Jim Kelly back in the day, over the infamous groin injury.

 

If he HAS in fact denied it, please disregard above.

I'll agree with you 100% that Hasek is a head case. (Show me a goalie that isn't.)

 

I also agree that he managed to get Darcy to look like a Doofus on the Detroit trade. He did want out of Buffalo when the criminals completely messed up the Peca situation. Prior to the Peca mess, Hasek had never given any indication publicly that he wanted out of Buffalo. Actually, he seemed pretty happy w/ the team and gave a lot of money to the community.

 

As for ticking off the fans, after Muckler fired Nolan, a lot of fans blamed Hasek for Nolan's departure although Muckler seemed to blame it more on Nolan's insistance on playing Ed Ronan instead of Satan and other matters of that nature. A lot of fans did not like Hasek even though he was a huge part of the team's success. It wouldn't surprise me if he felt a bit of resentment over the way he was perceived. Even with that, I can't think of anything he did or said to "tick off" the fans other than his extremely poorly thought out "I am now and forever a Red Wing" quote and his extreme displeasure with having to sign autographs at team events.

 

I don't consider a lack of a denial that he quit to be the same as admitting he quit. My guess is he saw the "quitting" accusation as a no win situation. If he reacts to it, he'd have gotten slammed for protesting too much. By ignoring it, my assumption was that he felt it to be such a meritless accusation that there was no need / point to refute it. Others, such as yourself, seem to see it as an admission of guilt. Either he protests too much or he's admitting guilt - either way, no win.

[BetweenThePipes00]

Also, I'm not aware of Hasek ever denying that he let that shot in on purpose? This is not say he hasn't done so, just that I'm not aware of it.

Are you serious? Did Norwood ever actually SAY he didn't miss the kick on purpose? I mean, every time a guy has a bad game does he have to immediatley announce, "I TRIED! PLEASE FORGIVE ME! I DIDN'T THROW THE GAME!" Why is it always a conspiracy? Pittsburgh was better that night.

Like dave_b said, if he wanted to throw the game he had plenty of chances to do it long before that.

Is he a total nutjob? yes. Do I question the injury in 1997 that caused the Jim Kelley incident? Absolutely. (Although his repeated problems since indicate SOMETHING may have been wrong, although maybe he could have played through it.)

But there is NOTHING to suggest he lost that Pittsburgh game on purpose. It makes no sense. if he wanted to screw the Sabres, why bust your ass to win a series and then wait intil Game 7 of the next series to do it? If he was pissed at management for not paying Peca and putting the best product out there, why win games and put more money in their pockets with every playoff home game?

Whackjob or not, he was a GREAT player and deserves to have his number retired. If you don't like him fine, he did enough things for people not to like him as a person, you don't need to make up more.

[Kristian]

If you don't like him fine, he did enough things for people not to like him as a person, you don't need to make up more.

Point taken, although the "Hasek quit on The Sabres against The Pens" isn't exactly something I made up on my own, I believe several sports reporters are the culprit in this case.

 

Although I'll admit, I deinitely don't like the guy, so maybe you're right, I might be biased.

[BetweenThePipes00]

Sports REPORTERS or talk radio hot heads? there is a difference. No one REPORTED that. Show it to me in print where the greatest goalie of our lifetime was accused by a legitimate REPORTER of tossing a game ... that would have been the story of the year.

[bottlecap]

Hasek is like Perreault was to the organization. THE superstar who put Buffalo on the map.

With Hasek it was like the little boy who try to plug up the leaks of the . (not that kind

of !) After awhile, the leaks became too frequent to deal with and we didn't have enough offensive firepower to respond. We leaned too heavily on Hasek.

 

I was insanely mad that Hasek let that one in against Pittsburgh, even the "no goal" against Dallas (as well as the suspect last game against Dallas) seemed quirky and stoppable.

 

And the way he skated off the ice at top speed against Pittsburgh, it was totally maddening, it was as if he was skating off forever and into history.

 

He didn't diss the fans, just the financially challenged organization who could spend on his lavish contracts, but didn't have enough left for offensive counterpunch, among other things.

 

I hope in time we can forgive Dom's misunderstood posturings and remember him for what he is, one of the greatest goalies of all time. He was homegrown and materialized from out of nowhere as a superstar right in front of our eyes.

 

The lesson we hopefully can learn from Hasek is that you can't just bank on one player. It's a team sport.

[Saber61]

Yes, Hasek let in a bad shot against the Pens. My question to you is: if in fact he really did quit on the Sabres in that game, why did he wait until the 10th shot of OT to quit? He made at least 5 incredible saves in that OT. He could have let any one of those go in if he in fact actually quit. It makes no sense whatsoever to say he quit.

well then something disastorous happend during that game cuze that was not dominik hasek in that net... that was the softest goal in overtime i have ever seen... i mean biron lets soft goals in but that was so easy to stop... all he had to do was put a glove up in front of it... instead of the eastern finals we get 3 years of future futility... and yea kasperitis stepped into that shot but whatever... its just a shot from the top of circle... that was sad... im still bitter to this day about him giving up like that... he stopped the first few because he didn't want to look foolish...

[BetweenThePipes00]

You've obviously never played the position if you think any shot from a wide open NHL player is "so easy to stop." I'm not saying it was an amazing shot no one could have stopped or anything, but it happens. He screwed up. he didn't do it on purpose, it's ridiculous.

[jzmack]

jeez the whole thought of hasek letting a kasparitis shot go by him on purpose is much less beleivable then hearing someone say the refs were bribed.

Besides no self respecting person would intentionally let a goon like kasparitis score on them.

[BetweenThePipes00]

It's always a conspiracy ... maybe it's easier for people to believe that and it makes them feel better than knowing their team was not good enough or just blew it or something, i don't know ...

[Saber61]

yea i don't see kasparitus as the offensive powerhouse that some make himout to be.... he is as stated above... a goon... defensivly sound yes but regardless a goon... you just don't let that happen in game 7 of playoffs in overtime no less!!!! like if it was lemiuex or jagr that scored ya ok thats fine... but freaking kasparitus...

[Taro T]

well then something disastorous happend during that game cuze that was not dominik hasek in that net... that was the softest goal in overtime i have ever seen... i mean biron lets soft goals in but that was so easy to stop... all he had to do was put a glove up in front of it... instead of the eastern finals we get 3 years of future futility... and yea kasperitis stepped into that shot but whatever... its just a shot from the top of circle... that was sad... im still bitter to this day about him giving up like that... he stopped the first few because he didn't want to look foolish...

I am absolutely dumbfounded by this post.

 

Yes, Hasek was (arguably) the best goalie of his generation, but that did not mean that he was perfect. Shots on occasion score. All it takes is a momentary lack of concentration and ANY shot taken by an NHL player could potentially score.

 

Hasek had/has a tendency to let in "soft" goals throughout his career. My theory on why that is, is that he KNOWS the shooter will not take a low percentage shot against him because of his reputation. The shooter KNOWS he has to take the best shot of his life to score on Dom, so there is no way that he will take a bad angle or far out shot. Because Dom knows the shooter won't shoot, he doesn't get fully prepared for the shot until the shooter has a moderate to high percentage shot available and he can get "handcuffed" on weak / low percentage shots. Kasperitis' shot fits that description perfectly. (As by the way, does the Lehtonin bad angle shot in the 1st of Game 6 '99. Which also was the ONLY goal he let in during that game.)

 

I remember seeing Mike Richter give up a goal in the playoffs on a shot from the other side of the red line. Ken Dryden let in a shot (I believe from Danny Gare) in Game 6 of the semis where Gare was literally standing behind the goal line in the corner. He threw the puck at the net, Dryden lost his balance, and the puck was in and Buffalo went on the the finals. It happens. I can give you several more examples of good goalies letting in bad playoff goals. None of these guys threw the game or the series. It's ridiculous to think that they would.