I don't know why people didn't like Pyatt. Comparing Enqvist to him is an insult (to TP). Anyway, he's not the worst, but certainly nothing to write home about. Then again, he IS the 6th skater (I'm gonna hope that was JM sending a message).
I don't find him to be anything like Pyatt. Pyatt was hustling and usually noticeable, just not ultimately productive in any way.
Engqvist is much less visible. It is supposed to mean he "does the little things right". Winning faceoffs isn't one of those little things. I guess he has the basic skill and intelligence to manage to skate 5-8 minutes a night in the NHL without being completely embarrassed or anything, and maybe over time that will help him improve and become a more noticeable/effective/contributing player.
I'm just not feeling like the Habs can afford to make that investment in his development at this point. They need all the contributions they can get. Even if it's occasional ones from a more energetic/involved 4th line.
I don't find him to be anything like Pyatt. Pyatt was hustling and usually noticeable, just not ultimately productive in any way.
Engqvist is much less visible. It is supposed to mean he "does the little things right". Winning faceoffs isn't one of those little things. I guess he has the basic skill and intelligence to manage to skate 5-8 minutes a night in the NHL without being completely embarrassed or anything, and maybe over time that will help him improve and become a more noticeable/effective/contributing player.
I'm just not feeling like the Habs can afford to make that investment in his development at this point. They need all the contributions they can get. Even if it's occasional ones from a more energetic/involved 4th line.
Completely agree.
Pyatt showed some intensity out there. Engqvist is just floating along doing...nothing, really.
He's similar to Tom Pyatt, which he means he's the biggest waste of roster space at the moment. I'm not saying he's bad player, but I think I'd rather see a goon playing out there instead of Engqvist. Reason being that with a goon, you'd at least see some energy that could potentially shift some momentum into our side instead of an emotionless, 6'4'' player who isn't even able to use size to his advantage. Engqvist was brought in as a faceoff specialist, but obviously he hasn't be able to provide in that department.
Seems like Martin has a man crush for emotionless, average 4th liners, reason why we have arguably the worst 4th line in the NHL (no toughness, no grittiness, no nothing).
Is there any concept out there of Engqvist's faceoff percentage in Hamilton? I'm sure I've read about it before. But the idea that he was brought in "as a faceoff specialist" seems a little alien to me. He does seem to project as a defensive/checking line player. Along the lines of the latter day Bonk, the center ice version of Dackell/Sundstrom. And he has tallness and shoots R. But I'd have suggested he was brought in more "for lack of having anything better" than "as a faceoff specialist". Maybe there is a hope that one day he can indeed develop into that latter day Bonk and be decent on faceoffs. But there surely was no hope/expectation that he could provide that element right off the hop?
I wonder what the odds are on players "developing into" Bonk/Sundstrom defensive types as a "fulfillment of their upside" as contrasted to the odds of players who start off with a higher perceived upside (and indeed higher performance) "settling into" Bonk/Sundstrom defensive types once they've been around long enough and become veterans in the league?
