Where did you state this, are you frigging kidding me? Alright as you wish.
You started up with a statement saying that he was exhaust coming into the NHL (which isn't even true to be honest, Laine's muscles were adjusting from the summer work out - absolutely nothing to do with being physically exhaust) and continued with a notion that one needs to work his way up to the first line, which he gradually did by finishing second in the league in goals. So again another statement that holds zero validity. The lines aren't combined by how great an individual is doing, but so that they'll serve the team's best interest. Laine playing in the second the entire season pretty much tells he was there to spread the wealth, not because he wasn't "good enough". Oh and of course lets not forget the ludicrous conclusion of
"the way NHL works, get used to it!" 
Then as for Connor you said he earned his position while Ehlers was doing even better in the very first games scoring multi point games and being absolutely great. So applying the logic of who's the most deserving again doesn't work, but that team dynamics comes first. Furthermore again, Laine wasn't even given an opportunity to make his tryout for this line, so someone making a statement that Connor had better success (or even work ethic) is simply false.
Regarding the third paragraph, Laine needs to work better to fit the line, it doesn't even make any sense since Laine is a workhorse. He doesn't consume alcohol and has shown nothing but devotion of becoming the best player in the planet (wherever that leads is up to him). Then justifying utilization by a compliment veteran players release to the press in regards to a youngster? Seriously? Wonder how many generational talents the NHL would have if all Gretzky's public compliments were 100% valid.
As for Maurice not liking Laine and using or misusing him as he pleases, even I wouldn't go that far. If you feel like Connor had the better cycling or tight traffic game, that's fine. We won't really know how he would have excelled with lets say Ehlers and Little and with far, far less open space on the ice (created by team's two best line drivers). I've said it before and I'll say it again, Laine didn't have to be in the first line in the begin with to at least have similar aTOI that he had in his rookie year. P.Mo significantly cutting that down instead finding ways to use him more was a bad move on his part and did not serve the cause of helping Laine develop better. In the end, Laine crawled out of the mud on his own with little help from the management (apart from Chevy acquiring Stastny, who isn't even an elite center, just good enough).
To summarise, you clearly felt and indicated that Connor was more deserving to play in the first line that Laine cause he was better fit and if Laine was the better player he would have made it there. Meanwhile you fail to acknowledge the fact that Laine was never given a proper opportunity, you ignore the entire team dynamics (spreading firepower), the fact that Connor was indeed fed far more on the silver plate than most other players in the team and basically every other detail that could have anything to do with how the lines are combined. Furthermore there are severe fundamental logical conflicts in the statements and some which are just plain false without even having to properly even examine them as I pointed out earlier. I've asked you time and time again for details or further explanation that would support the claims. For instance, what happened when Scheifele got injured and Wheelers become his short-term replacement. I suppose since you didn't have the answer I'll have to remind and elaborate. After a few games one out of the two wingers got dropped out and replaced from that line cause he wasn't able to contribute and play the game at desired level. Who again was it? Connor. So if he was so deserving, had way superior traffic, cycle and whatnot game, why did he got dropped out instead of Laine? Basically by reading your statements, you've been purposely leaving out every single factor that could have any significance to the discussion and hand-picking and gleaning on the ones that do serve the purpose. Have you ever heard of the term intellectual dishonesty by the way? Maybe you should google it out.
For the profile pict, kewl. Good to know you're a huge fan of Connor. Who would have ever guessed! xD
