Hindsight is 20/20 . . . except most fans expected to see Wiz play! Time to discuss.

Rewind back to March 2, 2015.

The Anaheim Ducks make a move at the trade deadline that sends the message to their fans and the rest of the NHL: We’re in it to win it.

(Technically, the team made two, but the Simon Despres trade does not need to be re-examined.)

By trading Rene Bourque, William Karlsson and a 2015 second-round draft pick to the Columbus Blue Jackets for 31 year-old James Wisniewski, the Ducks were clearly thinking short-term. Tired of failing to make it past the second round two years in a row, Anaheim’s front office was going all-in in its attempt to make the Stanley Cup Finals. After all, the 22 year-old Karlsson was Anaheim’s second-round pick in 2011, and he has a lot of upside. You don’t trade away your future unless you’re extremely committed to your present.

Even with Karlsson’s potential, it was clear to see that this trade was a short-term win for a Ducks squad that wanted to win, now. Anaheim’s power play ranked 21st in the NHL at the time of the trade, and Wisniewski’s 29 points in 56 games convinced the team that he could generate points from the blueline, especially when the team enjoyed a man advantage during the playoffs.

Fast forward to today June 2, 2015. The Anaheim Ducks’ season is over, and the man the team traded a good chunk of its future for didn’t play one second in the 2015 Stanley Cup Playoffs. Meanwhile, Clayton Stoner, the defenseman who received the most “love” (read: hate) from Ducks’ fans on Twitter played every single game, amassing a grand total of one goal, no assists, one point in 16 games.

The reason for playing Stoner against the Winnipeg Jets was apparent: the Jets were a physically punishing team, and Anaheim needed to able to go blow-for-blow against Winnipeg’s big boys. You can’t argue with the results: Anaheim swept a team that many people felt could and would upset the Ducks in the first round.

From that point on, however, Stoner’s playing while Wisniewski remained a healthy scratch became considerably less logical. Sure, head coach Bruce Boudreau chalked this up to the “chemistry” that Stoner had developed with Sami Vatanen, but Vatanen’s offensive production of 3-8-11 came without any help from Stoner, he of the single point. It doesn’t appear as if swapping out Stoner for Wisniewski would have slowed the Vatman down that much.

Meanwhile, Anaheim was outscored 10-5 over the course of Games 6 and 7 in the Western Conference Finals. One likes to think that Wisniewski would have produced more favorable results both offensively and defensively. Anaheim’s defensemen were caught way out of position early and often in Game 6, and when the Ducks desperately needed a goal to turn the tide in the early going of Game 7, everyone rolled snake eyes. Would the experienced Wisniewski have been able to cover some of the mistakes made by his more aggressive blueline-mates? Would his shot from the point have gotten Anaheim on the scoreboard before it was too late in Game 7?

Clearly, we’ll never know what Wisniewski could have added to the Anaheim-Chicago series. And hey – it’s not like Anaheim’s forwards played very well in Games 6 & 7, and goaltender Frederik Andersen surrendered 14 goals in the final three games of the series. You can’t blame us for wondering what a guy who is a $5.5 million salary cap hit for the Ducks through 2017-2018 could have added to this team, though.

Anaheim – you went out and paid for the guy. Why didn’t you play him?