The only reason to put a player back in juniors who earned a spot on the roster is long term development. If he's better off in juniors, you keep him in juniors, if he's better off in the NHL, you keep him in the NHL.
The burning a year on his ELC shouldn't play a role. Yeah, it might be nice for cap concerns in 4 years but what type of message does it send long term? "Hey Monahan, you're doing great in the NHL. Obviously a large part was your extensive off-season training and hard work you've put in since being drafted...But we don't want to worry about how much we pay you in year 4 so we're going to send you back down to juniors and instead of potentially making over a million dollars this year you'll get your $200 dollar a week stipend instead. Oh but when it comes to re-signing you in year 4 hopefully you take a discount with us and/or sign long term because of the loyalty you owe us."
Same with 2 way contracts and waiver eligibility. At this point I think it's important to have the players on the team who played their way onto the team if it doesn't affect their development. Best message to send throughout the organization going forward.
|