Mark Fraser

[bustaheims]

It's also worth mentioning, I think, that Fraser is only 26 with limited NHL experience. So while he's probably not going to turn into a superstar or anything I don't think we should look at him last year as the absolute peak of what he can be.

While there's some truth here, in general, players that are around Fraser's age have either reached their top potential or awfully close to it, regardless of NHL experience. For the most part, he is what he is and he's not going to be much more than that. He may be able to make some improvements in some areas of his game, but, in terms of his overall ability, there's unlikely to be significant improvement. While what he showed this past season may not be the absolute peak for him, odds are that it is awfully close.

 

[bustaheims]

I guess that's where we differ then. While I appreciated Fraser's physical game I think he definitely "burned" the team on a regular basis. The blueline's biggest problem all year was getting the puck out of our zone and Fraser was a large part of that. I think that was made clear in the playoffs when it became less of a problem after Fraser's injury forced him out of the line-up.

I agree. I think the positive impact of Fraser's physical play is largely overstated. Going for a big hit is only useful if you connect. When you miss, you generally leave your defence partner and your goalie hung out to dry - especially when you're not particularly mobile, like Fraser.

 

[Kin]

While there's some truth here, in general, players that are around Fraser's age have either reached their top potential or awfully close to it, regardless of NHL experience. For the most part, he is what he is and he's not going to be much more than that. He may be able to make some improvements in some areas of his game, but, in terms of his overall ability, there's unlikely to be significant improvement. While what he showed this past season may not be the absolute peak for him, odds are that it is awfully close.

I think that's true in a sort of overarching general sense when we're talking about NHL players but the one area I'd maybe not be as certain about is the idea that a defensive defenseman is necessarily as good in his own end at 25 or so as he's ever going to be. I think, and obviously this is a hard to quantify opinion, that a player's physical peak is about then and the loss of that can sort of mimic or amount to a loss of defensive acumen if they slow down or whatever but I think there are a lot of NHL defensemen who are at their best defensively, at least in terms of things like decision making, with experience.

 

[drummond]

I am actually glad they got Fraser back. He is - at least in my eyes - classic stay-at-home solid defensive D-men. The Leafs have plenty of offensive minded guys - Gards, Franson, Liles, Phaneuf, Reilly, but we are very much lacking a nasty s.o.b. down there who is relentlessly clearing the net with a little bit more edge. Gunnar is defensively very responsible, but he is not going to be that nasty guy. Holzer - I believe - could develop into that role as well. The Leafs need Bob Rouse/Sylvain Lefebvre (or Dmitry Yushkevich/Daniil Markov for younger generation) type of player badly. Opposition is way too much used to screen, bump into, run over our goalies. This has to stop and Fraser is the type of player to do exactly this kind of job. With all these offensive guys Kostka became redundant. Simple as that.

 

[Frank E]

I guess that's where we differ then. While I appreciated Fraser's physical game I think he definitely "burned" the team on a regular basis. The blueline's biggest problem all year was getting the puck out of our zone and Fraser was a large part of that. I think that was made clear in the playoffs when it became less of a problem after Fraser's injury forced him out of the line-up.

I agree. I think the positive impact of Fraser's physical play is largely overstated. Going for a big hit is only useful if you connect. When you miss, you generally leave your defence partner and your goalie hung out to dry - especially when you're not particularly mobile, like Fraser.

I don't know, I thought he made life pretty tough in front of the net.

 

[bustaheims]

I don't know, I thought he made life pretty tough in front of the net.

Well, that's sort of a double edged sword, because, while he was doing that, he was also screening his own goalie.

 

[Britishbulldog]

I guess that's where we differ then. While I appreciated Fraser's physical game I think he definitely "burned" the team on a regular basis. The blueline's biggest problem all year was getting the puck out of our zone and Fraser was a large part of that. I think that was made clear in the playoffs when it became less of a problem after Fraser's injury forced him out of the line-up.

I agree. I think the positive impact of Fraser's physical play is largely overstated. Going for a big hit is only useful if you connect. When you miss, you generally leave your defence partner and your goalie hung out to dry - especially when you're not particularly mobile, like Fraser.

I don't know, I thought he made life pretty tough in front of the net.

I don't know Busta.  Watching Fraser play I really never seen him trying to throw big hits, he seemed more inclined to throw punches if the opposition was being stupid.

As for being a double edged sword screening, rarely was Fraser's body screening the Leaf's goalie although it obviously did happen.  When the Leafs defensemen were not moving the opposition from infront of the goalies, the Leafs' goalies were screened every time.

 

[Britishbulldog]

I think the positive impact of Fraser's physical play is largely overstated.

Not to de-rail the thread about physical play not making much of a physical impact but I find it utterly confusing how people who played competitive hockey can declare this.

For NHL examples simply look last year at Buffalo with Scott in the line up compared to the year before, or the Leafs own Kadri in his interview on CBC with Ron McLean and Franson mentioned it on a separate occasion in an interview with TSN.  I have seen it with both my sons over the years as well.

I know some of you folks differ strongly with this point and I cannot understand why.  I experienced it for years as a player and then for many years as a parent.  You can't argue against what someone experienced....unless it was a gentlemen's league with a fighting/hitting ban.  Then I would agree.

Sooooo....I am happy that Fraser is on the defense with Gardiner, Franson, Gunnarsson, etc.

 

[Jalili]

I like the way this defense is shaping up. If they can find a home for Liles and re-up Franson I think we'll see the group come together nicely.

Fraser's physical presence is definitely important, as the Leafs don't have another D-man who brings that element other than maybe Dion (who's game at any rate has evolved over the years and is steadily moving from that style)...

I'm also of the opinion though that D-men who use good stickwork and positioning are often more efficient than those overly physical types.

 

[Tigger]

Seems like too much dough for a 7, fringe 6, dman. Hopefully he has more in him to give but I sincerely doubt it.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Well the one thing I would use to dispute that is his +/- number which was significantly higher than anyone on the team other than Kadri.  Now I know it's not a perfect stat and not one I rely on much but when you are a +18 and the next best d-man on the team is a +5, you are doing something right.

Like you said, it's not a perfect stat. I think Fraser's raw numbers explain why he has such a high +/-. His even-strength goals against line up pretty closely with the rest of the defence, but he had the highest even-strength goals for count. Even higher than Phaneuf and Franson's. So I think the fact that the 3 forwards that he played the most amount of ice-time with were Kadri, Kessel and JVR would explain why his +/- is so high.

 

[Jolly good show chaps]

Evening chaps. Since all the other teams would know that we have salary cap issues and limited funds to renew two players then would we even get much value from trading Liles (or even Franson)?

 

[Frank E]

Evening chaps. Since all the other teams would know that we have salary cap issues and limited funds to renew two players then would we even get much value from trading Liles (or even Franson)?

I don't buy that.  There's either a market for the player, or there isn't. 

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

Evening chaps. Since all the other teams would know that we have salary cap issues and limited funds to renew two players then would we even get much value from trading Liles (or even Franson)?

I don't really buy it either, but I think it will be moot, as Liles will definitely leave via buyout if he's not traded in the next couple days. That's my bold prediction for the year! If there is no trade for him, I don't think Nonis will resist the buyout with it only being 875k on the cap for the first two years. It gets him completely out of this years cap decrease jam. That solves this years problems all in one fell swoop.

 

[Tigger]

Well the one thing I would use to dispute that is his +/- number which was significantly higher than anyone on the team other than Kadri.  Now I know it's not a perfect stat and not one I rely on much but when you are a +18 and the next best d-man on the team is a +5, you are doing something right.

Like you said, it's not a perfect stat. I think Fraser's raw numbers explain why he has such a high +/-. His even-strength goals against line up pretty closely with the rest of the defence, but he had the highest even-strength goals for count. Even higher than Phaneuf and Franson's. So I think the fact that the 3 forwards that he played the most amount of ice-time with were Kadri, Kessel and JVR would explain why his +/- is so high.

IIRC, wasn't he also used in an awful lot of offensive zone starts? It's not the be all end all stat but it's telling.

Also, an aside, I think I'm missing where the opportunity to buy anyone out is coming from, isn't that window closed now?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Well the one thing I would use to dispute that is his +/- number which was significantly higher than anyone on the team other than Kadri.  Now I know it's not a perfect stat and not one I rely on much but when you are a +18 and the next best d-man on the team is a +5, you are doing something right.

Like you said, it's not a perfect stat. I think Fraser's raw numbers explain why he has such a high +/-. His even-strength goals against line up pretty closely with the rest of the defence, but he had the highest even-strength goals for count. Even higher than Phaneuf and Franson's. So I think the fact that the 3 forwards that he played the most amount of ice-time with were Kadri, Kessel and JVR would explain why his +/- is so high.

IIRC, wasn't he also used in an awful lot of offensive zone starts? It's not the be all end all stat but it's telling.

Also, an aside, I think I'm missing where the opportunity to buy anyone out is coming from, isn't that window closed now?

Yeah, I didn't want to get into the advanced stats but his quality of competition would have been easier as well.

Teams with arbitration cases get a small window to buy another player out. Even if they settled beforehand.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

Well the one thing I would use to dispute that is his +/- number which was significantly higher than anyone on the team other than Kadri.  Now I know it's not a perfect stat and not one I rely on much but when you are a +18 and the next best d-man on the team is a +5, you are doing something right.

Like you said, it's not a perfect stat. I think Fraser's raw numbers explain why he has such a high +/-. His even-strength goals against line up pretty closely with the rest of the defence, but he had the highest even-strength goals for count. Even higher than Phaneuf and Franson's. So I think the fact that the 3 forwards that he played the most amount of ice-time with were Kadri, Kessel and JVR would explain why his +/- is so high.

IIRC, wasn't he also used in an awful lot of offensive zone starts? It's not the be all end all stat but it's telling.

Also, an aside, I think I'm missing where the opportunity to buy anyone out is coming from, isn't that window closed now?

He played 2nd PK unit also, no?

 

[Tigger]

Teams with arbitration cases get a small window to buy another player out. Even if they settled beforehand.

For some reason I thought they had to have two hearings actually happen to engage that? I could easily be wrong, going from memory.

 

[Tigger]

He played 2nd PK unit also, no?

Yup, on a pretty good pk too so that's something but it wouldn't have much influence on his +- and if anything it might allude to the weight of his even strength protection, in terms of who he was utilized against and where.

 

[Kin]

Like you said, it's not a perfect stat. I think Fraser's raw numbers explain why he has such a high +/-. His even-strength goals against line up pretty closely with the rest of the defence, but he had the highest even-strength goals for count. Even higher than Phaneuf and Franson's. So I think the fact that the 3 forwards that he played the most amount of ice-time with were Kadri, Kessel and JVR would explain why his +/- is so high.

It's not a perfect stat, really not a good stat, but I do think that there's at least something to be said that if a guy has a good plus/minus he's not killing you defensively at the very least.