I don't think you'd take him off your list solely on the basis of what he did at 14, but you have to do a lot of homework on his personality assessment to make sure he's done a 180. And the article said he hasn't interviewed well. So put those together and I could see why he is off list for a lot of clubs.
And it wouldn't be some injustice if he isn't drafted. The kid would just have to start his career a little bit differently and work harder to prove he is a changed person. If he is as good as he seems I'm sure he could get a professional job.
I only talked about this one incident. I don't like the idea of people in glass houses throwing stones. I'm sure these scouts and GM's never took part in any hazing or bullying or never did anything shitty when they were 14 years old.
If the guy is a bad apple, it's not the main point of my prior post, and I think there's at least a little more merit to downgrading him. But if he's a bad apple, it's not because of this one incident, and this one incident shouldn't even be a main reason to say he's a bad apple. If someone's a bad person or not someone you want to be associated with, it's probably not because of one thing they did at the age of 14. If the kid isn't drafted because of this or if this is a main reason why this kid isn't drafted, I think it would be an injustice. It would speak to a culture where being the unlucky one to have your dirty laundry from when you were a kid aired is what opens and closes doors.
I said similar things about the criticisms you hear about Ryan Merkley. I think you have a lot of NHL teams that are trying to open and close doors for these players due to their actions at an age where the overwhelming majority of people do dumb and stupid things. It's even more ridiculous when we are talking about something someone did at the age of 14. By all means, if someone has violated the law, thats clearly a bigger issue. I'm not suggesting NHL teams run a draft for the prison population. However, I think there are a lot of people making these decisions who acted in these exact same ways at these ages that they are scrutinizing these kids for.
Just like hockey skills mature at different ages, people mature at different ages. Maybe a kid doesn't get it until he's 21, and then at 21 it clicks for him. I don't think that should close doors for him. I think thats unfair to him, and unfair to the next kid who comes along that similar things are said about. Most people generally at some point in their 20's-30's, which is the life of a hockey career, do mature and have things click for them to the point that their prior mistakes and ways as a kid aren't an issue. And obviously for some that won't happen. But for some players you draft, their hockey skills don't develop.