Frankly, I'm surprised at how near-sighted you're viewing this pick. Trade a defenseman to Edmonton? You knew that was never in the cards.
This selection is who the organization thinks will be the best player - as a chip in trade or as a guy who puts on the sweater - out of all the ones that they had to choose from. Not the guy that Edmonton will want. Not the guy that will maybe play this year or next. This is the guy that when you look at his Hockey's Future profile, you see a bigger number with a grade closest to A.
Not at all on this one, the only way I'm looking at this is long-term, and it still doesn't make too much more sense to me there, aside from the fact that we went forward heavy last year as we should have.
Right now, our LHD situation for the next 2-3 years plays out like this:
Hanifin - 2 years left on ELC
Slavin - 2 years left on ELC
Fleury - 3 years left on ELC
Carrick - rising but stuck behind depth.
RHS isn't much better frankly:
Faulk - 4 years left on contract
Pesce - 2 years left on ELC
McKeown - 3 years left on ELC
Right now, I see Bean as not really having a spot he can even really push for by the time he's ready (3 years) aside from the #7 slot unless a trade is made in the next couple years. The Edmonton quip definitely was me looking at things short-term, but on the other end of it I'm also looking at it as the point when the window of this team as a contender, not just a playoff caliber team, would be opening.
Effectively as I see it right now, picking Bean here is looking at the team having a need for another LHD in 5 years.
The problem I have is that we also have, even after the emergence of Aho, Roy, the Saarela and TT trades, and the Gauthier pick, far more pressing needs are still up front long-term. Even if Lindholm were to effectively make the move to C long-term, which looks very much up in the air at this point in his development curve.
So with that said this is how I was looking at things before tonight in the big picture:
Skinner - ??????? - Teravainen
Roy - J Staal - Aho
??????? - Rask - Lindholm
Woods - Bishop - McGinn
wildcards: Saarela, Wallmark, Tolchinsky
Slavin - Faulk
Hanifin - Pesce
Fleury - McKeown
wildcards: Murphy, Carrick, Wesley
Ned
Altshuller
Booth
Now, the issue to me at least, is how they project things from here. Bean of course jumps to the head of the defense wildcard slot in 3-5 years, but even with the addition of Gauthier, which allows Aho to move to a more comfortable more scoring oriented spot, we're still down a top 9 forward, and most notably it's a top 6 center. Even if Rask projects as a low end #1, which I think he can, we'd still need a high end #2 or #3 to compliment him long term when our window is opening. I'm not confident that either of those two options are Saarela or Wallmark. I'm a little more confident if it's Lindholm and one of those two are moved to the wing hole, but we have yet to see Lindholm do that on a consistent basis. Less confident that he can be a strong 3 (which is needed with a low end 1) or Rask proving to be better then a low end 1.
That's where the issue on this comes in for me, in the opportunity cost when the window should be opening for us. Dmen generally take a longer time to mature and the Bean pick patches a hole that I don't see existing with a guy that should be getting ready at 21-22 that could have been filled with a guy that was 19-20 at the forward positions where a hole is currently projected.
Opportunity cost when it's time for our window to open is that I'm looking at. Also why I liked the idea of D later on, when it's more likely to run in to an impact player (compared to forward) and still have them be available for us when our window is set to open. That's the biggest reason I bring a trade up, better to get that asset now when it's cheaper then to be forced in to an overpaying situation when the cost for doing so will be much much higher.
That said, if the belief is that Bean flat out is far better then the forward options that were available, and he very well could be, that's another matter entirely and makes up for the difference in lost opportunity. I don't see it personally, but then again I was much higher on guys like Kunin and Bellows that would be there at 13 then most were in this draft.