It was interesting to hear Charlie on BSH come as close as I've heard a Philly writer come to blaming development.
He essentially said he believes Provorov may have been affected by all of the instability in the organization since he's been here, and that it ultimately stunted his development.
So, not blaming "development" or any person or section of the organization specifically - but more of a general mish mash of multiple GMs, coaches, assistant coaches, defensive partners, expectations (heralded and treated as #1 for lack of better options), constant roster churn, etc.
Said he believes Provorov would be more realistically suited as a #3. Same for Sanheim.
Which begs the question - if we have no #1, and no #2 defensemen in the organization (either on the team or in the pipeline), what is the benefit in trading Provorov? How do you address what would be an even weaker defensive corps? What is the path to a #1 defenseman?
If it's through drafting, that requires multiple picks, a lot of luck, and likely many more years before that player is an impact player.
If it's trough a trade, it will cost a lot. Teams don't trade #1 defensemen.
If it's through a free agent signing, it will probably be fool's gold.
Is trading Provorov a smart move? Or just another move that will set the franchise back multiple years?