I don’t think he’s saying Darling doesn’t deserve the money because of poor play. I think he’s saying Darling doesn’t deserve the money because he’s an alcoholic whose alcoholism is preventing him from being a functional part of the organization.
I think that’s what he’s saying.
I don't think he is saying that, and we really don't need to speculate on the reasons at all, because per the SPC, as a starting point player failing to render his services according to the SPC is grounds for termination.
If the failure is because a health concern, including mental health, SPC 5 says that if the player is "disabled or unable to perform his duties under this SPC" this needs to be determined by the team physician, and the situation is governed by that paragraph from then on. Do note that the player is not entitled to the benefits of the SPC if it is "a disability which is not caused by an injury sustained during the course of his employment as a hockey Player including travel with his team or on business requested by his Club".
Regarding alcohol and substance abuse, I believe there are explicit NHL/NHLPA-mandated procedures about (at first) directing the player to the rehab and (secondary) rules about termination in case the player fails to timely rehabilitate.
There may be some NHL guideline about granting personal leaves, how long they are allowed to last, and if the player is to enjoy the benefits of the SPC when on one. There probably are stipulations preventing that such leave can't last so long that is defeats the purpose of the SPC or CBA (= player plays hockey in the NHL or affiliate league according to the SPC and gets paid salary that counts against the cap as the CBA mandates).
We likely are not allowed to have Darling on the leave indefinitely. Him not being allowed to be sent to ECHL without his own approval, his return to CLT may well be the only possible allowed option at this point.