We need to sign Paul Ranger
- Thread starter WTFMAN99
- Start date
I'll say this. If we go into the season with 3 or 4 AHL D men, we will NOT be making a push for the playoffs, we will be making a push for Mackinnon.
If we have any 3 combination of Fraser, Kostka, Ranger, Holzer, we are in big trouble.
paulhiggins
Registered User
- Feb 4, 2006
- 2,807
- 827
Leaf Army
Registered User
I find this thread sad. I agree Ranger should be signed. But the thought that we "need" him is depressing.
He hasn't played NHL hockey in over three seasons and was only average-slightly above average when he did play.
He's nice to have for sure but certainly should not be a "need" for any team with plans on making the playoffs.
He hasn't played NHL hockey in over three seasons and was only average-slightly above average when he did play.
He's nice to have for sure but certainly should not be a "need" for any team with plans on making the playoffs.
Rare Jewel
Patience
We didn't "need" him when we had Schenn and Franson, But both are aren't going to be here(Franson may sign) so their absence will mean we need another defense needs to be brought in.
I've been fortunate to see a large portion of Ranger's games for the Marlies and from my viewings he's proving to me he's far too good for that league. He's strong as an OX, has a booming shot and could contribute on the PP, And also for a guy 6'3 he skate very well. He's everything you'd want in a modern defenseman.
It may sound bad to say we need or should sign a guy who's been off for 3 years, But I really do think this is a special case.
Leaf Army
Registered User
I agree with everything you're saying.
My point is the only reason he's become a "special case" for us is because we're so bad. That's what makes it depressing.
Franson spent most of last season as our number seven. Now he's considered a lock. I've heard the names Fraser and Kostka thrown around for our defence. This is going to be bad. We're going in the wrong direction.
Rare Jewel
Patience
I think a fit and able Ranger could play in most teams top 4, That's just my opinion and we'll probably find out fairly soon.
On Franson, I think he was missed used and miss treated by Wilson. He never was given the ability to settle in here last year IMO, It seemed if he even made one mistake he'd be sat or even scratched in favor of Komisarek some nights. It would interesting to see how RC would use him if he does re-sign cause I think he does have more to offer.
As for Kostka and Fraser. Kostka has been real good, And deserves a chance but he'll be in tough. Fraser is a call up at best.
I disagree, there's a reason alot of people want him. Back when he was playing he was usually a top 4 d-man on tampa.
So now that we've seen he's gotten most of his game back, if he can regain top 4 form that's a solid addition to our lineup.
Mess
Global Moderator
Unfortunately my friend when your team is 29th in goals against (regularly among the bottom 5 yearly) and your defense depth chart reads as;
Dion Phaneuf
Jake Gardiner
Carl Gunnarsson
John-Michael Liles
Mike Komisarek
Cody Franson
Korbinian Holzer
Michael Kostka
Mark Fraser
Jesse Blacker
& 18 year old Morgan Rielly ??
So in fairness, I think the idea of Ranger being an improvement in the minds of those suggesting it, is based on a desire to make the Leafs better in hopes of better & playoff end results.. But when your team needs all the help it can get, that makes even Paul Ranger a potential improvement on one of the worst defense cores in the NHL.
However I agree with your point, which sadly simply speaks to the quality (or lack there of) at present of what the Leafs defense core looks like. Transactions designed to address the situation would have more impact by bringing in better players than Paul Ranger, as opposed to swapping out bottom/depth players would.
shakes
Pep City
You are talking about Ranger like he's a scrub. He's not. He hasn't played in the NHL not for lack of team interest, it was a personal choice. If teams thought they had a chance to sign him, there would be multiple including "playoff" teams. He's a good NHL defenceman and it wouldn't be an indictment on how good or bad the Leafs are at all should he be playing. I would rather him than Schenn.
Most NHL defences have 4-5 guys they actually like having out on the ice, and another 2-3 guys who are sketchy, play little and can't be trusted in important situations.
Our D could use an upgrade or two but it's pretty solid when you look around the league at what everyone else has.
If Ranger makes the team it will be because he's good enough to play in the NHL. The fact that he hasn't played for a couple years wouldn't mean our defence is bad, anymore than him failing to make the team would mean our defence is good.
zeke
The Dube Abides
- Mar 14, 2005
- 66,937
- 36,957
calling ranger an AHL defenseman is idiotic.
Ranger was a top-pair shutdown defensive defenseman in the NHL at ages 23-25.
I have to agree. Having him in the lineup only makes up deeper and stronger and better prepared to move a body or two to bring in something else we need. We have offensive guys, we need some shut down guys.
Man Bear Pig
Registered User
I'd be shocked if Ranger wasn't getting regular minutes only a few games into the season. He's a legit NHLer. He only signed with the Marlies because he wants to be in Toronto(family) and for no other reason.
Paul Ranger was a top pairing D for the Lighting not that long ago, played very well and put up points. He's still young enough to get back to the same way he played before. Last I checked, any team in the NHL would want to have a young player who has played 24 mins a game on the top line. It was a great coup by Burke and and co. to get this young player. Hardly depressing at all.
shakes
Pep City
How so? According to the re-entry waivers he is exempt because he's played 320+ pro games and hasn't played in the NHL in the last two years.
Really? Tell me this then smart guy, where does Ranger currently play?
And, I said any combination of those 4 listed. Did I say he sucked? NO!!
And furthermore, what has he done for the NHL lately?
I fully expect him to do ok, but if you think he is a game changer at the NHL level, they you sir....are a typical leaf fan.
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 76,666
- 43,194
Really? Tell me this then smart guy, where does Ranger currently play?
And, I said any combination of those 4 listed. Did I say he sucked? NO!!
And furthermore, what has he done for the NHL lately?
I fully expect him to do ok, but if you think he is a game changer at the NHL level, they you sir....are a typical leaf fan.
How many times have you watched Ranger play?
I think Ranger will make this team, not sure about his contract. I heard its AHL only and would become a free agent if he wanted to go to the NHL, Leafs would hope he is loyal. NOt sure how accurate that is. Saying that I believe he will make this team out of training camp if he is there. I think he can elevate his game further than the AHL player u see. His conditioning is extremely high, that helps him maintain a nice pace of play. I think he could replace Gunnarsson in a heartbeat. Koska and Holzer should get looks too. Lets be honest the LEafs D isnt very good. David Broll and Morgan Reilly will be at camp.
Phaneuf-Gardiner
Reilly-Ranger
Holzer-Liles
Franson 7th man(if he comes back)
Komasarek hopefully fishing in Algonquin park?
Phaneuf-Gardiner
Reilly-Ranger
Holzer-Liles
Franson 7th man(if he comes back)
Komasarek hopefully fishing in Algonquin park?
shakes
Pep City
The defense isn't bad. It's the goalie that hasn't been good. Why does everyone blame the defense in every level of hockey for the shortcomings of others?
