Maybe...but Fraser played with some serious heart. Its been awhile since Ive watched Ranger, but does he play with a physical edge as well?
- Colin Dambrauskas

I remember Ranger being a pretty big guy.

And, honestly, offensively, it's not even close between him and Fraser. Ranger is muuuuuch better.

It was the first day of the Marlies’ training camp, and the first day of the rest of Rangers’ hockey careeer. There has been plenty of speculation as to why Ranger, then a 25-year-old defenceman with the Tampa Bay Lightning, left the game in the first place. Personal reasons, we have been told. Ranger did not speak about it then, nor did he speak about it Thursday.

But after introducing himself, he talked about how good it was to be back after what seemed like an eternity away from the game he loved. And as spoke, his eyes went red and started to water.

Ranger managed to hold it together, but you could tell this was difficult for him. Something is buried back there in his past, and whatever it was nearly cost him his career. So this second chance is something special.

“It is a new beginning for me, in a way,” Ranger said, smiling. “It’s going to be a good road. I’m excited.”

IMO...Brennan.
- djamon

Brennan? Have you seen him play?

There is a reason he was let go by fla and Nashville.

Fraser still has arbitration and the Leafs can't walk away from it with what he will get.
- LeafMan

uh oh!

Or maybe they simply chose Ranger over Fraser.
- Pecafan Fan

Yup that could be - especially if Fraser is looking for too money $$.

Maybe you have no clue about what Nonis has on his plate.

Teams today need cheap serviceable NHL players, it might be a risk, but a small one to add a former NHL player who seemed fine in the AHL. I am sure they were able to gauge where he was at. If they cant sign Franson or Fraser for what they want, they need to fill the roster spots.
- senstroll

True. Guessing Ranger signed for 750k. We now have him, Holzer at 788k, Brennan at 600k and whatever Fraser gets, which will probably be a mill and low change at the most battling for 6-8 spots on the roster.

Nothing wrong with depth. We had to give up a 4th for O'Byrne as a rental at the deadline.

Or maybe they simply chose Ranger over Fraser.
- Pecafan Fan

Or maybe they didn't. Maybe they move Liles or Franson. Maybe Ranger is the 7th d man. I don't see this move being too threatening to Fraser, as long as his contract demands are reasonable, I'd say he sticks with the team in the 6th d man role.

So...Franson for...?

Not really a great scenario because the team needs defense more than anything...

Rangers deal is 1 year around 1M according to Dreger.

Paul Ranger is not NHL depth...he's a Marlie. Money is very tight at the moment, and we have valuable players who need contracts. The idea that we "outbid" other teams for a guy who does not makes us better is a waste of time and assets, IMO.
- djamon

How do you know he doesn't make us better? Guy in his prime was playing solid d and puttin up 30pts. Yeah we don't need that.

So...Franson for...?

Not really a great scenario because the team needs defense more than anything...
- AdamFrench

Then due to the cap, it has to be a high pick or prospect?

So...Franson for...?

Not really a great scenario because the team needs defense more than anything...
- AdamFrench

maybe franson is the bonus for someone taking on liles, same way we got him..

i'm interested to see how this unfolds

franson/liles for a pick/prospect

I remember Ranger being a pretty big guy.

And, honestly, offensively, it's not even close between him and Fraser. Ranger is muuuuuch better.
- Pecafan Fan

Yeah but the Leafs need some shutdown guys more than offensive. Thats why I liked Fraser with the Leafs...and Im sure Carlyle did too.

Paul Ranger is not NHL depth...he's a Marlie. Money is very tight at the moment, and we have valuable players who need contracts. The idea that we "outbid" other teams for a guy who does not makes us better is a waste of time and assets, IMO.
- djamon

He is organizational depth.
No assets were wasted.

Maybe you have no clue about what Nonis has on his plate.

Teams today need cheap serviceable NHL players, it might be a risk, but a small one to add a former NHL player who seemed fine in the AHL. I am sure they were able to gauge where he was at. If they cant sign Franson or Fraser for what they want, they need to fill the roster spots.
- senstroll

I do know he has 3 RFA's to sign. Players who are far more important than Paul Ranger. Signing a guy like Ranger, when you have very little money to spend, before you make a decision on those guys is a mistake, IMO.

Logic says you lock up the important players and then fill out your depth with what's left.

Maybe...but Fraser played with some serious heart. Its been awhile since Ive watched Ranger, but does he play with a physical edge as well?
- Colin Dambrauskas

No. Fraser is better than Ranger...especially in Carlisle's system.

Don't overthink it Colin. The Leafs can bury the first 900k in the minors without any Cap concern. In theory they could sign 9 guys at 900k to battle for spots 5-7 on the D. The 6 losers get sent thru waivers and at worst end up suiting up for the Marlies. No Cap consequences at all.
- The Law

Like I mean I guess...and I initially figured this was nothing more than a depth move...but signing Ranger at 1M(ish) then Kadri, Franson, Fraser....thats cutting it DAMN close.

Paul Ranger is not NHL depth...he's a Marlie. Money is very tight at the moment, and we have valuable players who need contracts. The idea that we "outbid" other teams for a guy who does not makes us better is a waste of time and assets, IMO.
- djamon

he is nhl depth. we just signed him to a one way contract. and he's an upgrade or similar to liles. and cheaper. liles will be traded for sure.

why do you guys want to trade phaneuf so bad?
- njdevil35

Its not all of us, only a select few. Here are my reasons:

1. He is extremely slow which his backward skating
2. He takes stupid penalties at the worst times
3. He has no accuracy with his shot
4. He cannot perform a proper breakout without carrying the puck from end to end (failing 3 out of every 4 times)
5. He never ties up anyone in front of the net
6. He provides no leadership on the ice to warrant wearing the "C" (maybe off the ice, but I don't get to see that)
7. At $6.5M per season, e have so many better options available

So...Franson for...?

Not really a great scenario because the team needs defense more than anything...
- AdamFrench

I'm not ready to go there yet - still hopeful it's Liles.

If we start hearing that Franson's looking for big $$ and term then we gotta go there.

I don't know he has 3 RFA's to sign. Players who are far more important than Paul Ranger. Signing a guy like Ranger, when you have very little money to spend, before you make a decision on those guys is a mistake, IMO.

Logic says you lock up the important players and then fill out your depth with what's left.
- djamon

...I'm gonna guess Nonis has probably thought about this a wee bit more than you have.

No. Fraser is better than Ranger...especially in Carlisle's system.
- djamon

Hate to say this but... Fraser is nothing special.

No. Fraser is better than Ranger...especially in Carlisle's system.
- djamon

You know that how? Ranger is solid defensively and a better skater. Scores more too.

No. Fraser is better than Ranger...especially in Carlisle's system.
- djamon

Carlsisle. I'll take your opinion as fact, you seem to know your stuff.

No. Fraser is better than Ranger...especially in Carlisle's system.
- djamon

Fraser can't skate.
Ranger can.
The end.