Sekera is a sold 3D that was played like a 1D because this team has ZERO top pairing defensemen.
I mean, we've seen players played above their actual abilities before, why are we complaining about Sekera?
I think that's Semantics.
Look at it this way;
A pro team in dire need of improvement on D hires Sekera to its highest priced D contract as a vet player that is obviously the biggest D signing the team did in the off season and of a player that was obviously going to be slotted in top pairing. That was going to be the use of Sekera this year. I'm sure he knew it, I'm sure everybody knew it. Not like it happened through surprise, injury, trade, or attrition, Sekera was supposed to be a top D this season on a club badly in need of one.
The reality is Sekera this season was going to have to punch above weight, knew it, and didn't do particularly well at it.
Are we really paying this guy 5.5M for being a non physical D with no particular offensive production, who is suspect in own zone and doesn't do anything particularly well. I would argue that value hasn't been obtained thus far in this contract.
What have Sekeras strengths been. 82 games, still looking for it.
TBH GRyba slotted in here more seamlessly than Sekera and McLellan recognized it with toi and situational shift use.