This is where you are losing us. You imply that DL gave Brown a better contract than his on-ice performance permits. You say you don't know who specifically from management leaked the information about Brown losing the captaincy to the press. So... if you feel management's fairly taken into consideration Brown's sacrifice to give him this contract which he is now (at least from an on-ice perspective) overpaid for, and you don't know who leaked the news of the captaincy being stripped of him, it's very confusing to understand why Brown deserves better from management.
The ONLY contention either your article or Brown has is it getting leaked ahead of time. And even then, you don't know who did it. So this article title and content is, at the very least, sensationalism with a bias towards Brown; it comes across as one-sided.
I do appreciate what Brown brought, and admittedly think things would be better, for both Brown and the Kings, if he moved on to a better situation where he wouldn't have to be the captain and he really can focus on his own game and just playing more fearlessly.
And frankly, while the notion of a pissed off player being a more competitive player may be true, and people are happy about Brown being upset about the situation, I just don't have the same perspective. Yes, it's good that he cares. However, Brown wasn't made a captain specifically because he was a very competitive or heavily driven individual. He was made a captain because he fit into the mold of the family and community Lombardi was trying to build, and now there's a tone where he feels betrayed.
Trust me, I want Brown to succeed as much as any other player as long as he's a King, but I do not see this relationship being healthy or ending well with the current trajectory... and for that, I do hold both sides responsible.