Seriously? You think cribbing from Webster's adds anything to the discussion? I'm not even sure what you think "qualified" means, but most of the guys we've put on our defense wouldn't be "qualified" to play on nearly any other team in the league, so going from one "unqualified" guy to another isn't meaningful.
Well, you either can't understand what Zadina is at this point or refuse to. So yeah, look up the word, understand what it mean and maybe rethink the crap you wrote. You might want to look up what 'qualified', means apparently too by the way. In hockey sense it would mean that the player is actually able to do what he's assigned to do on the NHL ice. You want to pretend to be like an ignorant child (probably because you can't defend you position and need to divert it into something else) fine, I'll treat you like one.
Oh and you have proof that the defensmen we have wouldn't be able to fill a roster on other teams? Outside of the fact that most teams don't need them because they have their own players comparable in effectiveness on the ice and often to a better cap hit, you have no actual leg to stand on here.
Further, it's absolutely untrue to suggest that the only place you can develop is in GR. That's unsubstantiated trash that's not backed up by anything you can quote. I can just as easily say it's better to play in a league where you're actually challenged by actual NHL players. But then, you'd probably argue that Zadina is better off spending max time in the CHL, since it's a "developmental league", and then you'd screech at me to look up what "developmental" means.
The only one thats suggesting that is the invisible voice in your head. Key words that I used was 'might be' and I stand by that. Maybe you should also work on your comprehension skills along with interpretation of words...
It might be good for him, sure, but what if he isn't handling his matchups and Blash gives him soft minutes as a result? (Meaning, little ice-time) Where do you think he'd be better off? And Blashill will do that because the point of making matchups is to get the upper hand on your opponent. How many times do I have to remind folks here of Pulkkinen, Jurco?
If Blash wants to sit Zadina in the press box for the next 3 years, should Holland sit on his thumbs, shrug sadly, and say, "well, he's the coach and that's that"? If KH and the development staff think that it's better for Hronek to play in Detroit this year, should they just suck their thumbs if Blash would rather play Kronwall's best impression of a pylon? I don't buy it.
"
Yeah, lets not pretend to be completely out of touch with reality here. If in 7 years, where it's clear that Zadina is a bust, then your scenario might actually happen. However, so far, we have yet to have anything even close to that happening, ever, in the entire league. If somehow it does, yeah, Holland would be justified in firing the guy. (Hence hold him accountable) In this case, for being delusional.
I also don't buy the comparison. There's a world of difference between needing to ok every line up, or calling down decisions mid game, and telling a coach "The organization wants this guy to play, that's why we've moved him up from GR/left him in Detroit/signed him/whatever. You can either play him in whatever role you'd like, or find alternate employment."
Well, as was pointed out, two heads are better than none and there are plenty of options and opportunities to explore and discover. When you have a situation of who to put on the ice in Marchenko vs Oulette, ultimately, it should be a coaches call. When he has a clear directive to make the playoffs for instance, you don't tell him which players to do it with, which was what was happening with Babcock. (although, too much information is missing to really know what exactly was happening.) When it comes to signings and things like that, I'd think as a GM, you absolutely need to discuss these things with the coach. I mean, some are no brainers, like Tavares but for the most part, its a matter of filling in the dimension, so to speak. If the coach says, I need a guy who's good as a front-net presence type, you see whats around and make a decision on who'd be at the top of your list and on.