Yes, 2000 rated players are still human and they sometimes forget things like King safety or piece development due to pursuit of other goals they deemed important as well. Just a few observations I'd like to comment on:
- 8...Bd6?! looks like a natural developing move which is more active than ...Be7, but here ...Be7 is needed simply to block a check from the e-file. Knowing what you know now, ...Be7 seems objectively better, but I still think ...Bd6 was okay without knowing this.
- 16. Rxd6 would have been White's better try because they at least double pawns on the d-file, but black would still be winning there.
- 19...Rad8 the annotations state "black has a development advantage" and although this is true, the post-game analysis evaluation of this position is about -3.60 and this massive edge is likely due to something more than just a slight lead in development; material is equal, so a lead in development might look like -1.00 or -2.00, but not this great of an edge for black. I think the rest of black's advantage comes from the fact that white also has a weak and isolated e4 pawn. This is a weakness which the d2 Knight doesn't love babysitting and the white Bishop is also on the wrong color complex as the e4 square even if it was to get developed. The black isolated pawns on a7 and c7 are of no detriment because white has no real way to attack them; whereas the e4 pawn most certainly can fall under attack. For instance, the King is already halfway there in this endgame.
I think I need to work on static advantages like king safety and tactic opportunities. I got in trouble at the beginning of the game because I underestimated how powerful Re1+ was in making my pieces passive and my king unsafe, but after I consolidated, I capitalized on the lead in development reasonably quickly.
What do you think of this game? Am I missing something in my analysis? Thanks!