korab rules Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 If you had to define MacArthur as a player how would you? If I were to list every Sabre as either a scorer, play maker, grinder or defensive minded I wouldn't have MacArthur listed anywhere. I would say that he's a mix of them all. Which is good and bad. He plays tough, certainly bigger than his size. He is responsible defensively, and has demonstrated a scoring touch and the ability to set up his linemates. His biggest problem was his consistency last year. I chuckled when I read one of the poll responses predicting 15 goals this year for Mac, five in the first five games, five around christmas, and five in the last five games, because that was pretty much his season last year. If he can play consistently at the level he played in his good stretches last year, he will be a legitimate top six forward. He's young, though, and he will struggle with consistency. I think we will see a platoon approach to wing on the second line, depending on who is playing hard and producing (or injured). Paille, Gerbe, Kennedy and maybe a couple others will all see time in that spot. Don't forget that Kennedy was a winger in college, although they seem bound and determined to make him a center. He really needs to work on his draws.
nfreeman Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 If you had to define MacArthur as a player how would you? If I were to list every Sabre as either a scorer, play maker, grinder or defensive minded I wouldn't have MacArthur listed anywhere. He's only had one season, so it's a bit early, but if I had to give a definition to his potential role, I'd say scorer -- kinda like an early Pommer. Pommer had 18-12-30 in his first full year; Mac had 17-14-31. (Granted Mac played in 71 games while Pommer played in 58, but Pommer played on a better team). I'm not saying that Mac will get there, but he seems like he has (like Pommer) a good sense for getting to the open spots around the net and the hands to convert passes into goals. So I think that's his strong suit and if he sticks in the NHL it will be because he keeps that going and parlays his opportunity to play with TC and Pommer into 23-25 goals this year. I'm not saying that I'm confident this will happen, but I think that's his upside.
shrader Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 He's only had one season, so it's a bit early, but if I had to give a definition to his potential role, I'd say scorer -- kinda like an early Pommer. Pommer had 18-12-30 in his first full year; Mac had 17-14-31. (Granted Mac played in 71 games while Pommer played in 58, but Pommer played on a better team). I'm not saying that Mac will get there, but he seems like he has (like Pommer) a good sense for getting to the open spots around the net and the hands to convert passes into goals. So I think that's his strong suit and if he sticks in the NHL it will be because he keeps that going and parlays his opportunity to play with TC and Pommer into 23-25 goals this year. I'm not saying that I'm confident this will happen, but I think that's his upside. At a very basic level, if you want a definition of MacArthur's role, he falls into the skill player label. I'd say your post describes that label pretty well.
deluca67 Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 He's only had one season, so it's a bit early, but if I had to give a definition to his potential role, I'd say scorer -- kinda like an early Pommer. Pommer had 18-12-30 in his first full year; Mac had 17-14-31. (Granted Mac played in 71 games while Pommer played in 58, but Pommer played on a better team). I'm not saying that Mac will get there, but he seems like he has (like Pommer) a good sense for getting to the open spots around the net and the hands to convert passes into goals. So I think that's his strong suit and if he sticks in the NHL it will be because he keeps that going and parlays his opportunity to play with TC and Pommer into 23-25 goals this year. I'm not saying that I'm confident this will happen, but I think that's his upside. Pominville had 1 game of NHL experience going into his first season with the Sabre. Mac had 56 games going into last season. Looking at Mac's first full season the stretches of 17 and 21 games without a goal is a cause for concern. It's a concern because unlike a Pominville, Mac doesn't bring much else to rink. Even last year when Pominville was having trouble I thought he was still contributing by either back checking or creating chances. When Mac is not on the score sheet he is invisible. For the Sabres sake I hope maturity washes that away. The Sabres need huge contributions from MacArthur, Paille, Kennedy and other unexpected sources to have a shot at the playoffs this season.
... Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 I'm not so sure where this idea that Paille had more potential comes from. For me it comes from watching games. I don't know, nor do I care, about the scouting reports. Once you're in the big club, your play there is all that matters. When Paille plays well - he hits, he rushes the net, he looks great. Aside from a few "pretty" plays by MacArthur, he doesn't look as good as Paille does when both are playing at their respective high levels. And Paille scored 19 in his first full season.
HockeyTruth Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 If you had to define MacArthur as a player how would you? If I were to list every Sabre as either a scorer, play maker, grinder or defensive minded I wouldn't have MacArthur listed anywhere. Interesting, what is his level of failure?. Just how many goals and assists do you figure he'll score?
korab rules Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 For me it comes from watching games. I don't know, nor do I care, about the scouting reports. Once you're in the big club, your play there is all that matters. When Paille plays well - he hits, he rushes the net, he looks great. Aside from a few "pretty" plays by MacArthur, he doesn't look as good as Paille does when both are playing at their respective high levels. And Paille scored 19 in his first full season. I would agree with this. I think Paille brings more to the table - has good size and occasionally demonstrates a willingness to use it. He has at least as much offensive talent as Mac. Problem is that work beats talent when talent doesn't work. I am very down on him at the moment. His lack of effort last year was disconcerting. My guess is he will be lumped in as sweetener in whatever deal gets made to dump Tallinder this year. A change of scenery and the realization that he needs to change his ways to stick in the bigs may be good for the kid.
nfreeman Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 I would agree with this. I think Paille brings more to the table - has good size and occasionally demonstrates a willingness to use it. He has at least as much offensive talent as Mac. Problem is that work beats talent when talent doesn't work. I am very down on him at the moment. His lack of effort last year was disconcerting. My guess is he will be lumped in as sweetener in whatever deal gets made to dump Tallinder this year. A change of scenery and the realization that he needs to change his ways to stick in the bigs may be good for the kid. I must disagree -- I think Mac has better hands and a better sense of how to get open around the net. As for dealing him with Tallinder, I'd love to see it, but you're asking another team to take $4.6MM worth of salary albatross off of the Sabres' necks. It might happen, but I'm skeptical.
inkman Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 I must disagree -- I think Mac has better hands and a better sense of how to get open around the net. Agreed. I've seen the Paille has more skill or is the same player and I cringe. I don't see that at all. Mac can finish, has a knack for finding loose pucks, and finding open areas around the net but he just needs to put it all together. Paille can be physically dominant (rarely chooses to be though), has Mike Ryan like hands, and barely a clue what to do in the offensive zone.
korab rules Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 I must disagree -- I think Mac has better hands and a better sense of how to get open around the net. As for dealing him with Tallinder, I'd love to see it, but you're asking another team to take $4.6MM worth of salary albatross off of the Sabres' necks. It might happen, but I'm skeptical. As between Mac and Paille - hopefully they will both play lights out for long stretches and we will have lots of evidence to support our respective arguments. Mac is craftier around the net, I will give you that. As to the move, I don't see it happening until near the trade deadline (unless some team just gets decimated with defensemen injuries). Hank won't cost them much at that point in the season, and comes with no future cost due to his UFA status. The later in the season it goes, the less the sweetener will be needed.
deluca67 Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Agreed. I've seen the Paille has more skill or is the same player and I cringe. I don't see that at all. Mac can finish, has a knack for finding loose pucks, and finding open areas around the net but he just needs to put it all together. Paille can be physically dominant (rarely chooses to be though), has Mike Ryan like hands, and barely a clue what to do in the offensive zone. Their production in their first full seasons is pretty damn close.
shrader Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Their production in their first full seasons is pretty damn close. I can't help but wonder what impact the surrounding cast had for each player in his first full year and the part-time duty before that.
deluca67 Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Interesting, what is his level of failure?. Just how many goals and assists do you figure he'll score? I think everyone would like to see 25 goals this season. That would be a successful season for Mac and would be giant step towards getting this team back to the playoffs. If he stays in the 15- 20 range it would be a OK season as long he eliminates the long scoreless streaks.
deluca67 Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 I can't help but wonder what impact the surrounding cast had for each player in his first full year and the part-time duty before that. They finished 10th both 1st seasons. The only change over that time was trading Campbell two years ago. Besides that the cast is pretty much the same, as it is this year.
shrader Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 They finished 10th both 1st seasons. The only change over that time was trading Campbell two years ago. Besides that the cast is pretty much the same, as it is this year. I'm just thinking that if that Drury-Briere cast was as influential as most like to think, Paille had more access to that than MacArthur did. I'm mostly just thinking out loud on this one.
spndnchz Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 I'm just thinking that if that Drury-Briere cast was as influential as most like to think, Paille had more access to that than MacArthur did. I'm mostly just thinking out loud on this one. So MacArthur is more of a leader and Paille more the follower?
deluca67 Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 So MacArthur is more of a leader and Paille more the follower? Didn't Paille Captain a National Junior team?
shrader Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 So MacArthur is more of a leader and Paille more the follower? Based on their output in junior, I would've expected MacArthur to put up more numbers than Paille. Since Deluca had them at very similar first seasons, it would look like Paille was the bigger success as a rookie. But then he had his 2nd season, completely ruining that idea. It all means nothing though. All that matters now is that they progress as hockey players. Paille's off to a bad start on that, but still has time. Hopefully MacArthur does go down that Paille's 2nd season path.
Mbossy Posted September 30, 2009 Report Posted September 30, 2009 Didn't Paille Captain a National Junior team? Team World Junior Canada Captain in 2004. IMO, it's that NHL jump. Some get scared, others lead or are great followers (ie get kicked in the ars and like it) who finally 'get it'.
Eleven Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 Looks to me like you all are comparing Big Macs and Whoppers. Both are cheap and widely available, both will temporarily satisfy your hunger. But neither one is good.
X. Benedict Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 Didn't Paille Captain a National Junior team? Paille has shown only flashes of Jam as a professional. That's part of what makes his development somewhat enigmatic.... 10 to 20 PIM a year ain't what you want on the third line. But let's be clear.....MacArthur ain't going to be much good unless he can crack the top 6 and score. MacArthur's role is pretty clear....score and chip in and don't hurt the team on the backcheck. Paille has a third line role and is needed on the PK. Kennedy could make him redundant. I don't see Paill cracking the top 6 based on his last 40 games. But you never know.
nfreeman Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 Paille has shown only flashes of Jam as a professional. That's part of what makes his development somewhat enigmatic.... 10 to 20 PIM a year ain't what you want on the third line. But let's be clear.....MacArthur ain't going to be much good unless he can crack the top 6 and score. MacArthur's role is pretty clear....score and chip in and don't hurt the team on the backcheck. Paille has a third line role and is needed on the PK. Kennedy could make him redundant. I don't see Paill cracking the top 6 based on his last 40 games. But you never know. good post.
That Aud Smell Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 Thursday practice updateThe Sabres are just on the ice at HSBC Arena and Drew Stafford remains in a red (non-contact) jersey, meaning it's looking highly unlikely he'll play Saturday night against Montreal. Toni Lydman is still skating on his own and is almost certainly out. Tyler Myers is clearly skating as the No. 7 defenseman as the pairs appear to be Craig Rivet-Chris Butler, Steve Montador-Andrej Sekera and Henrik Tallinder-Nathan Paetsch. The forward lines remain the same as yesterday: Vanek-Roy-Connolly, MacArthur-Kennedy-Pominville, Grier-Gausted-Hecht and Kaleta-Ellis-Paille. http://blogs.buffalonews.com/sabres/2009/10/thursday-practice-update.html Myers as the #7? First, I apologize for needing to ask this, but will his sitting in the press box count as 1 of the 9 games where we get to keep him in Buffalo? In any case, I feel let down by this development -- it was like "Ooooooh, they're keeping the Kid Giant up with the big club ... oh, wait - he's not going to play." Maybe the plan is to play him in game #2 later next week? Another question re: the forward lines: Do I read that correctly as saying that Connolly's skating as a RW? I guess I always imagine him on the pivot -- didn't Roy flourish playing RW with Drury? Why not move The Sausage over to RW?
Spudz Posted October 1, 2009 Report Posted October 1, 2009 Thursday practice updateThe Sabres are just on the ice at HSBC Arena and Drew Stafford remains in a red (non-contact) jersey, meaning it's looking highly unlikely he'll play Saturday night against Montreal. Toni Lydman is still skating on his own and is almost certainly out. Tyler Myers is clearly skating as the No. 7 defenseman as the pairs appear to be Craig Rivet-Chris Butler, Steve Montador-Andrej Sekera and Henrik Tallinder-Nathan Paetsch. The forward lines remain the same as yesterday: Vanek-Roy-Connolly, MacArthur-Kennedy-Pominville, Grier-Gausted-Hecht and Kaleta-Ellis-Paille. That even smells terrible. I certainly hope that doesn't last.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.