All my point is, taking the player completely out of the picture.
But you can't remove the player from the equation since the player is largely responsible for where his career ultimately ends up.
Just because a prospect doesn't make it in another organization isn't an exoneration for his development. It doesn't mean that his development wasn't ruined or the player wasn't mishandled.
IMO, it probably means he was never going to make it no matter where he was drafted.
I don't buy that teams/coaches can sabotage players careers to this degree.
This "poisoned well" theory doesn't really fly with me personally.
You will never know because we can't rewrite history. But I just hate the posts that use it as vindication for Therrien and Lefebvre when their track record wasn't very good.
In the end, Lefebvre and Therrien were fired for lack of results and Scherbak is someone they didn't get results out of. I don't think the Kings games have any value at all in the debate.
Yeah I certainly don't think Therrien and Lefebvre should be exonerated from anything...they were both terrible.
But maybe we should re-examine the way we look at the roles of coaches.
They don't have the power to make a player someone he's not. I'd venture to say that the biggest obstacle in Scherbak's career so far is the player himself.
Sure, we can look at Therrien and Lefebvre...but why stop their?
What about Kevin Constantine? What about his coaches in Russia when he was a youth player? Do they not all have a part to play in the career of a player?