|
 |   |
|
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Multimedia Central Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities Work in Sports
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE |  |
Will he or won't he? Neither Hasek, Sabres are exactly sure what lies ahead
Posted: Monday May 01, 2000 11:20 PM
On the surface, the management and coaching staff of the Buffalo Sabres said all the right things about retaining goaltender Dominik Hasek for another season. Scratch a little deeper, however, and you have to wonder. Both general manager Darcy Regier and coach Lindy Ruff noted they wanted the five-time Vezina Trophy winner and two-time NHL MVP back for another season, but both men admitted that issue is yet to be decided. That means the decision is likely to be a financial and practical issue rather than an emotional one. Even before he revoked his retirement announcement under circumstances as dubious and doubtful as the ones in place when he first announced it, Hasek held most of the cards. He still does. Should he retire and walk away, the Sabres get nothing in return and the expectation is they could live with that. Should Hasek want to play again, it seems he would first have to tell the Sabres what his plans are. It's likely they would want a commitment from him for a full season with no distractions and some firm idea about 2001-2002. It also appears that if Hasek wants to continue playing but for another franchise, management would like for him to put that request on the table for it would certainly impact how they plan for the future, especially the expansion draft. However, Hasek's not likely to do that and thus it becomes and interesting game of cat and mouse. Hasek was non-committal at the season-ending locker clean-out day. Saying only that "it was a good question." When Hasek unretired late in the regular season, he said he would play another season, but he was less than concrete on that at season's end, saying he expected to be back but that he hadn't yet talked to management and didn't want to say more until he had. There are whispers in HSBC and other stops around the league that Hasek's representatives have quietly informed people that Hasek wants to play at least two or even three more seasons in the NHL. That would seen to go along with the deal he signed with Louisville to endorse a goaltender product line. The bigger question, however, is whether or not Hasek wants to do that in Buffalo or someplace else. The issue is important to all sides because of the upcoming expansion draft. Regier said all season that he would not trade Hasek during the season, but he has never gone beyond that. Hasek's salary --$7.5 million for next season and a $9.3 club option after that is a factor, but the expansion draft is another, perhaps more serious problem. To keep Hasek and up-and-coming goaltender Martin Biron, the Sabres would have to protect both players. That would force the Sabres into a situation where they could protect just three defenseman and seven forwards, a high price indeed if Hasek isn't fully committed to another season in Buffalo. Right now the Sabres are talking like they can handle that, but ownership hasn't weighed in on this issue yet and the fact that Hasek is 36, coming off a season in which injuries became a factor and the high cost of keeping him in terms of losing younger players, the issue is anything but decided. No one is making a definitive statement just yet, but it's quite possible that the league's most spectacular goalie could be on the market soon. One could also discern from that press conference that the Sabres do not necessarily see a long-term future for Alexei Zhitnik in a Sabres sweater. Sabres coach Lindy Ruff made noteworthy comments about Zhitnik's poor play in each of the last two regular seasons. He noted that in the past, Zhitnik recovered to play well in the playoffs, but that was certainly not the case this spring. Coach Lindy Ruff at times this season was livid with Zhitnik's poor work habits and penchant for stupid penalties. The situation got worse in the playoffs when Zhitnik took a silly retaliation penalty that nearly cost the Sabres the one-game they did win in the playoff series with Philadelphia. Zhitnik getting himself suspended for Game 5 didn't help his cause either.
Speaking of disarrayWe would be remiss if we didn't point out that the seemingly never-ending problems in Philadelphia appear to be taking a toll. Interim coach Craig Ramsay has been walking an especially tight line in Philadelphia, where Neilson has been making repeated requests to be able to return as head coach. Ramsay, who has a lifelong relationship with Neilson is quick to point out that he will go back to his assistant role as soon as he's told, is being portrayed as being just a little too ambitious in some hockey circles. The criticism is understandable, put patently unfair. Ramsay is trying to be loyal to the organization and the team and Neilson, but the Neilson matter is out of his hands. The decision as to who coaches is being made by ownership and management -- read Ed Snider and Bob Clarke -- and they have been reluctant to make a change given the fact the team is playing well under Ramsay. Aside from the on-ice success, there are politics involved, but it has more to do with Clarke and Neilson and, by extension, Eric Lindros. Neilson is a Lindros guy. He's on record as saying the Flyers can't win the Cup without Lindros. Lindros, recovering from a concussion, wants -- some say -- needs to play again to establish his worth in the NHL, but that's not likely to happen unless Neilson regains control of the team. Ramsay's stance is that he will play anyone who shows up and is declared healthy enough to play, but many insiders believe that in the Lindros matter Clarke will never allow that to happen. Many believe Clarke wants Lindros out of Philadelphia and the best way to accomplish that is to have the team win -- or at least play well -- without him. Should the Flyers win the Cup or even have a long playoff run without having Lindros in the lineup, it would be infinitely easier for Clarke to completely banish him in the offseason. Should Lindros come and play well, that would make it harder for Clarke to be rid of him. Ramsay has handled this matter about as well as can be expected given the politics involved, but it's wrong to say he wouldn't step aside when told to do so. Neilson has been his friend and mentor since Ramsay's junior hockey days some 30-plus years ago. He would turn the reins over to Neilson in a heartbeat, but Clarke's not likely to allow that to happen. The tip off here is that Neilson has never said a single bad word about Ramsay or the work he is doing. However he ripped the Flyers management and ownership on a recent interview on the Fan radio in Toronto saying that the club apparently "didn't want a cancer patient and a friend of Eric Lindros" behind the bench. Neilson later tempered that criticism to some degree, but the message is out there and it clearly supports the Clarke-hates-Lindros theory. Clarke this week told reporters in Philadelphia that there are certain things he can't say regarding the situation, a cleverly worded message to Neilson to keep quite. It will be interesting if Neilson does that or opts to cut his ties with the Flyers organization. He's known to be upset that a contract-extension that was on the table during the regular season no longer seems to be available. If he senses his time with the Flyers is over, he might get even more vocal about the way he believes he's been treated. Jim Kelley covers the NHL -- and the Sabres -- for the Buffalo News. His notebook and Rumor Mill appear weekly on CNNSI.com. The opinions expressed here are solely those of the writer.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
