Tatar and Nyquist come to mind, as they were NHL ready prior to being called up, but Holland signed retreads instead of letting them hit the NHL sooner. But its nearly impossible to play this 'what if' game because no matter who is brought up the counterfactual can be brought against it. So I think in the end, much like "who could Holland traded for" troupe, it can easily be a disingenuous "so there".
Prior to becoming full-time players:
Tatar - 27GP, 9 points
Nyquist - 58GP, 18 points
So while we can't know exactly what would have happened if they were brought up sooner, we can make a pretty good guess. It's not like they got zero chances to steal a job earlier.
Since you can't "prove" that they're worse players, how bout we just go with the fact that they missed out on money. In a sport where your career is probably only 10-15 years that matters. So yeah, sitting in the AHL on buses and being underpaid because Holland signed Dan Cleary is going to hurt player relations. Maybe not all of them, but it's a legitimate reason to be pissed off.
When your RFA negotiations are going to be based mostly on comparable statlines, playing low minutes because veterans are ahead of you despite being worse plays is going to hurt your contract.
So play better and prove you deserve more opportunity?
Most players with good heads on their shoulders look up to veteran players and try to learn from them. They don't see a Cleary as a roadblock, they see him as a valuable resource to learn from.
If you don't like being on AHL buses you have two options: act like an entitled brat and complain, or quietly work your butt off and prove that you deserve more.
One road leads to success, the other rarely does.
It's not like you get more money if you are brought up early and simply don't play well. In the long run doing what's best for your development is the best way to ensure you maximize your earning potential.