Edited Jul. 4, 2022 at 5:06 p.m.
Quoting: Alfie11
This is a pretty terrible take. There’s a reason guys typically don’t play their off side, and that’s because they’re usually much better on their strong side. There’s a reason there’s only like 5 guys in the league that regularly play their off side in top 4 minutes effectively. And demanding that a talented rookie figure it out and play a position he’s never played before (and is more difficult than his usual position) is not the right way to develop players. It doesn’t show that he doesn’t want to take his game to the next level, it just shows that he doesn’t want to be thrust into a role destined for failure. It would make a lot more sense to move a guy like Rielly or Muzzin to their off side to get the rookie set up for success, but they’re not gonna do that because even though they are established top 4 guys, they are not good on their off side either. If you have problems with a guy who was drafted and developed to play a position wanting to play that position, you should trade him before you ruin his career. His belief is totally justified, and you literally just confirmed it with this comment.
“it’s not set up for him to have a fair shot on his strong side” - Sandin’s concern
“there is a spot, just not on his strong side” - you
???????
Agreed.
You’re basically asking Sandin to:
A) play a position you may be bad at and therefore EARN LESS MONEY potentially if you’re on a bridge - wink wink *we for sure aren’t tryna to pay you less*
B) play a more difficult role on the team and do well and earn a decent deal (if he’s on a bridge) - WINK WINK
C) lowest probability, perform insanely well
I know he needs a deal but I don’t think the Leafs are gonna offer much term unless he takes a low AAV; so basically if he’s gonna sign for 1-2 years playing him in a weaker position is realistically a win win for the Leafs and a risk for Sandin.
All this on a young still developing player. I would rather develop a strong LD then stagnate his positional development in return for a “want”, rather than a need. You need good LD, you don’t need a flexible D (D= LD/RD).