I don't
Hence the idea that the next coach had to instill some sort of defensive skill or structure that would help make him a more complete and more valuable player. The idea, I'm sure, was that the offense would still develop further but that sacrificing a little of it to improve on defense would be worthwhile. To this point, it hasn't been, although the sample size is still small due to his injury issues.
No one thought, "We're going to make Zegras into a mediocre third line winger!" They were trying to get his defense to a level where he could be relied on to play in more situations and thus would be more valuable.
Of course that wasn't the intent. Zegras put up back to back 60+ point seasons, but he was giving much of that back defensively. Certainly that second season was atrocious. The points were shiny, but they distracted from the glaring issue, which was that teams were just as likely to score when he was on the ice as he was (if not more so).Z was playing #1 center first for the worst team in the league who just sold everything off. Do you think him being slightly better at defense and scoring 40 points would have been an improvement? I honestly don't even get what your point is here
Hence the idea that the next coach had to instill some sort of defensive skill or structure that would help make him a more complete and more valuable player. The idea, I'm sure, was that the offense would still develop further but that sacrificing a little of it to improve on defense would be worthwhile. To this point, it hasn't been, although the sample size is still small due to his injury issues.
No one thought, "We're going to make Zegras into a mediocre third line winger!" They were trying to get his defense to a level where he could be relied on to play in more situations and thus would be more valuable.