Using your singular logic of wins and losses, should Helleson have played ever again because we lost four games with him in the lineup, including two shutouts? Nope, because he still needs to play to develop and the team isn't going to pin losses on one player. The Ducks still think Helleson has a good future to develop, higher than Vaak, who was used like a fringe, vet D man they didn't mind scratching for weeks on end.
View attachment 969639
With your acknowledgement that Zell is the better prospect and being okay with three consecutive healthy scratches, then it does make you wonder how does one develop if they're not on the ice playing games, earning game experiences, and trying to improve on-ice game? Zell was not scratched for bad play like Minty was earlier in the season. Zell was scratched due to rotation.
Anaheim is doing long rotations, apparently. That does make the development growth become slower because a youth can be out for a week or longer.
Since the Ducks don't have a fringe, vet D man in the AHL to bring up to help alleviate the rotation, we will continue to have this roster construction dilemma. We are in year 3 of the reset rebuild, which should be a development year. Instead, Verbeek now says there is competition to be in the lineup as youths, two of whom have less than a full NHL season's worth of game play experience. It sucks for any youth to be healthy scratched for rotational purposes, especially extended healthy scratches that can last a week or longer. That is a macro problem.