HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Habs sign James Sanford

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-08-2004, 07:57 PM
  #1
montreal
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 23,683
vCash: 500
Habs sign James Sanford

http://www.canadaeast.com/apps/pbcs....65/-1/TTSPORTS



Here's what the article says at the bottom, "- Former Wildcats defenceman James Sanford has signed a two-way contract with the Montreal Canadiens. That means he will have two pay levels depending on whether he suits up for the organization in the American Hockey League or the East Coast Hockey League"


So Hamilton just got some depth. Don't know what they will do with Derick Martin. Looks like Shasby is ECHL bound, Sanford could be to once Hainsey/Komisarek are ready to go.

montreal is offline  
Old
10-08-2004, 08:04 PM
  #2
zurg999
Registered User
 
zurg999's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Brampton ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,532
vCash: 500
Much appreciated Dan.

zurg999 is offline  
Old
10-08-2004, 08:31 PM
  #3
montreal
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 23,683
vCash: 500
Also read that Olivier Michaud was sent to Long Beach of the ECHL but I haven't seen it officially yet, someone said that Pat Hickey reported it.


Sanford's profile is up on the main page.

montreal is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 12:05 AM
  #4
Freaky Habs Fan
Registered User
 
Freaky Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: New-Brunswick
Posts: 9,505
vCash: 500
Nice signing by the Habs...he seems to be a good kid even if he's small...

Freaky Habs Fan is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 09:43 AM
  #5
gabpas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Aylmer
Posts: 197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freaky Habs Fan
Nice signing by the Habs...he seems to be a good kid even if he's small...
I am seem to recall he was quite small. Any info on that?

gabpas is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 10:12 AM
  #6
Mooch
Registered User
 
Mooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NC/Toronto/Florida
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,960
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Mooch
Dont know much about him, but he should be a good addition for a weak Hamilton D if someone goes down to injury..

Mooch is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 10:17 AM
  #7
gabpas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Aylmer
Posts: 197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mooch
Dont know much about him, but he should be a good addition for a weak Hamilton D if someone goes down to injury..
Just curious as to what you see in Sandford that will make him a good addition? I saw him play a number of times last year. He looked very ordinary and was not impressive in the finals last year against Gatineau and I remember him to be quite small. Did not see much of a prospect in him at all.

gabpas is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 10:21 AM
  #8
Mooch
Registered User
 
Mooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NC/Toronto/Florida
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,960
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Mooch
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabpas
Just curious as to what you see in Sandford that will make him a good addition? I saw him play a number of times last year. He looked very ordinary and was not impressive in the finals last year against Gatineau and I remember him to be quite small. Did not see much of a prospect in him at all.
Im just assuming hed be good depth for the team this year since the D corps is weak. Ive never seen him play, i dont even know who he is. But you have?? You dont think hes a good addition, even as a 5th or 6th d-man??

Mooch is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 10:27 AM
  #9
gabpas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Aylmer
Posts: 197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mooch
Im just assuming hed be good depth for the team this year since the D corps is weak. Ive never seen him play, i dont even know who he is. But you have?? You dont think hes a good addition, even as a 5th or 6th d-man??
I think he is a career minor leaguer because of his size and his defensive game looks quite weak. He has good offensive potential and that's about it. I think we need to sign and develop prospects on defence with NHL potential as we are weak in that area. I would be tempted to sacrifice some of the smaller offensive prospects on the Habs (e.g Plekanec, Locke) to obtain some defensive prospects. Perhaps they did sign him as a depth player and he is just filling a hole for the time being. He may well end up in ECHL given that he signed a two-way contract.

gabpas is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 10:58 AM
  #10
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,841
vCash: 500
I'm just generally in favour of the Habs signing any prospects, of any type, at any position, that they have room for. It's a freebie, afaic, and I get aggravated when they invite a guy to camp and then let him walk (e.g. Delmore and Walser) to another team, even if the player probably wasn't a really great NHL prospect.

Sanford has some of the same characteristics as Bouillon, and if he looked good in camp (which he must have) and if we have room for him somewhere in the ECHL or AHL as a spare, then sign him on, by all means. Ditto for Labelle and any others who cross our path. In fact, I wish we could have our own ECHL team, and be free to fully stock it with hordes of these kinds of players. I'd like to see hockey go further in the direction of the mult-tiered pro development system like for major league baseball. Having a dedicated "AA" team in the ECHL would be great.

Blind Gardien is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 12:49 PM
  #11
Fan
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Who is making the decisions;Gainey or Savard because I see absolutley no sense in signing another undersized defencemen when there are already 4 or 5 of the same types.
Go look at Tampa Bays prospects,you wont find any undersized players at all.
Stop this nonsence now Gainey.

Fan is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 12:51 PM
  #12
Mooch
Registered User
 
Mooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NC/Toronto/Florida
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,960
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Mooch
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan
Who is making the decisions;Gainey or Savard because I see absolutley no sense in signing another undersized defencemen when there are already 4 or 5 of the same types.
Go look at Tampa Bays prospects,you wont find any undersized players at all.
Stop this nonsence now Gainey.
They didnt sign him for the nhl, but ahl or echl.

Mooch is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 01:04 PM
  #13
gabpas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Aylmer
Posts: 197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien
I'm just generally in favour of the Habs signing any prospects, of any type, at any position, that they have room for. It's a freebie, afaic, and I get aggravated when they invite a guy to camp and then let him walk (e.g. Delmore and Walser) to another team, even if the player probably wasn't a really great NHL prospect.

Sanford has some of the same characteristics as Bouillon, and if he looked good in camp (which he must have) and if we have room for him somewhere in the ECHL or AHL as a spare, then sign him on, by all means. Ditto for Labelle and any others who cross our path. In fact, I wish we could have our own ECHL team, and be free to fully stock it with hordes of these kinds of players. I'd like to see hockey go further in the direction of the mult-tiered pro development system like for major league baseball. Having a dedicated "AA" team in the ECHL would be great.
It would be nice to go back to the multi-tiered pro development like the old days but unfortunately this is also a financial issue these days with most teams having at most one minor league team and sometimes sending/sharing players on another team such as the ECHL. I think there are some teams who have even less players in their farm system. That being said, most NHL teams need to concentrate on developing potential NHL players and therefore should not be wasting time with players who will at best be minor league players all their life. Sad but that's the way things have gone. Who knows what will happen if the lockout issue is ever resolved.

gabpas is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 01:05 PM
  #14
Fan
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mooch
They didnt sign him for the nhl, but ahl or echl.
So that means he has no shot at the Big team ?
Tampa Bays top 20 prospects list their smallest prospect[6-1 200lbs] as undersized by NHL standards.
The drafting credo of Tampa is SIZE and Skill.
They won the Cup.
Savard should take a lesson from these guys as they know how to build an NHL team, not an always stuggling to make the playoff team that runs out of stamina as they are simply too small.


Last edited by Fan: 10-09-2004 at 01:09 PM.
Fan is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 01:44 PM
  #15
Mooch
Registered User
 
Mooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NC/Toronto/Florida
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,960
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Mooch
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan
So that means he has no shot at the Big team ?
Tampa Bays top 20 prospects list their smallest prospect[6-1 200lbs] as undersized by NHL standards.
The drafting credo of Tampa is SIZE and Skill.
They won the Cup.
Savard should take a lesson from these guys as they know how to build an NHL team, not an always stuggling to make the playoff team that runs out of stamina as they are simply too small.
Well Richard and St louis are small players. Let me run you thorough our prospects a bit. Kostitsyn, Hossa, Chip, Lapieriere, Ryder, Urquhart, Milroy all have good size or good enough size to be effective in the nhl. Higgins, Pleks are small but very powerful players, and should have no problems playing against bigger opponents because they have great speed, and that great strength down low in thier legs. Now of course theres the weaker yet very skilled porspects...Perezhogan.

So for the most part, were not small. Were not huge either. Id say were in between with an excellent mix of size and skill like you say. As for our D corps, it is small, but that may change down the road.........

Mooch is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 02:11 PM
  #16
Next Best Thing*
 
Next Best Thing*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 6,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan
So that means he has no shot at the Big team ?
Tampa Bays top 20 prospects list their smallest prospect[6-1 200lbs] as undersized by NHL standards.
The drafting credo of Tampa is SIZE and Skill.
They won the Cup.
Savard should take a lesson from these guys as they know how to build an NHL team, not an always stuggling to make the playoff team that runs out of stamina as they are simply too small.
Ahem, did they win that cup using their farm team?

Next Best Thing* is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 03:34 PM
  #17
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan
So that means he has no shot at the Big team ?
Tampa Bays top 20 prospects list their smallest prospect[6-1 200lbs] as undersized by NHL standards.
The drafting credo of Tampa is SIZE and Skill.
They won the Cup.
Savard should take a lesson from these guys as they know how to build an NHL team, not an always stuggling to make the playoff team that runs out of stamina as they are simply too small.
Your example of Tampa Bay bringing in size and skill in order to win the Cup is ludicrous.

Who are three core players in Tampa? Brad Richards, Martin St.Louis and Boyle. Not exactly big tough guys, eh? St.Louis was not even drafted. Boyle (to my memory) was not drafted or at least not a top 5 round pick. Richards was a third round selection.

And these are behemoths, aren't they?

Learn to judge players by how they play; not their stats or size.

Mike8 is offline  
Old
10-09-2004, 10:30 PM
  #18
saskhab
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 994
vCash: 500
There is no collective bargaining agreement in place to guide signings of players by NHL teams. I assume he was signed by Hamilton, not Montreal, and the article has it wrong. He may have been promised an invite to the next Montreal training camp, but I'd assume his status is similar to J-P Cote's last season, and that he is not a Habs prospect officially.

saskhab is offline  
Old
10-10-2004, 12:54 AM
  #19
Form and Substance
Registered User
 
Form and Substance's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,673
vCash: 500
Well Richards insn't exactly small is he?

Form and Substance is offline  
Old
10-10-2004, 01:04 AM
  #20
Kirk Muller
Registered User
 
Kirk Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brrr -18, Gomez Cold
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leachmeister2000
Well Richards isn't exactly small is he?
Not undersized by any means, what about 6-0, 180, I could be wrong just a bit by memory and appearance on ice, BUT he is soft as butter.

The point is though, his size isn't a factor because of exceptional skill, and a bit better than average skating.

Kirk Muller is offline  
Old
10-10-2004, 11:48 AM
  #21
KILLger
Registered User
 
KILLger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,671
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to KILLger Send a message via MSN to KILLger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan
So that means he has no shot at the Big team ?
Tampa Bays top 20 prospects list their smallest prospect[6-1 200lbs] as undersized by NHL standards.
The drafting credo of Tampa is SIZE and Skill.
They won the Cup.
Savard should take a lesson from these guys as they know how to build an NHL team, not an always stuggling to make the playoff team that runs out of stamina as they are simply too small.
Most of their prospects don't have much skills..

KILLger is offline  
Old
10-12-2004, 10:20 AM
  #22
Darz
Registered User
 
Darz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Where's the ANY key?
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan
So that means he has no shot at the Big team ?
Tampa Bays top 20 prospects list their smallest prospect[6-1 200lbs] as undersized by NHL standards.
The drafting credo of Tampa is SIZE and Skill.
They won the Cup.
Savard should take a lesson from these guys as they know how to build an NHL team, not an always stuggling to make the playoff team that runs out of stamina as they are simply too small.
Tampa Bay's farm system right now is widely condiered pretty weak. I think HF has them ranked in the same general area as the Leafs. Now I agree rankings don't mean a hell of a lot, but using Tampa Bay as an example doen't make alot of sense. A team that wins the cup with guys like St. Louis (and Richards, who defiantely isn't considered big by any means) obviously doesn't only at skill and size.
I agree size is important, but when you overvalue size you end up drafting (and signing) a bunch of Lindsay Vallis's, Terry Ryan's and Brent Bildeau's.

Darz is offline  
Old
10-12-2004, 03:19 PM
  #23
obcd1
Registered User
 
obcd1's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 640
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8
Your example of Tampa Bay bringing in size and skill in order to win the Cup is ludicrous.

Who are three core players in Tampa? Brad Richards, Martin St.Louis and Boyle. Not exactly big tough guys, eh? St.Louis was not even drafted. Boyle (to my memory) was not drafted or at least not a top 5 round pick. Richards was a third round selection.

And these are behemoths, aren't they?

Learn to judge players by how they play; not their stats or size.
St. Louis was not drafted but signed by Calgary and then signed as a UFA by TB

Boyle was not drafted but signed with Florida and then he was traded to TB for a 5th(Martin Tuma)

Richards was drafted in the 3rd round like you said (64th overall)

obcd1 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:09 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.