Not sure how you got this from my post. I made 2 points:
1) Bringing in the likes of Sbisa, Bitetto, Benn, etc. to provide below-replacement results while giving prospects minimal opportunity and a very short leash during those opportunities impacts development. So does "seasoning" prospects in the AH: who have nothing left to learn in the AHL. Not sure there's anything controversial there. I'd have said the same about Connor, JMo, Roslo, Stan, Samberg, Kocacevic, Perfetti etc.
2) In signing Schmidt with substantial salary and term Chevy took on cap risk and an additional risk in prospect development. You argue that the Jets will automatically play a capable prospect over a highly-paid vet player -- in your example, should that prospect show better than Schmidt. I am not at all sure they would, partly because of inbuilt bias in favour of the vet; as PoMo used to say, 'the vet wins the tie," and also because of the optics of paying a guy you worked hard to acquire 5.9 million to warm the bench. I don't think Bowness is that coach or the Jets that org, or we would have seen Schmidt benched for more games over his early tenure here and Pionk benched in favour of literally anyone on the basis of the utter crapness of most of his past 2 seasons. But he wasn't benched. Not once.
I like Samberg, and he finally got a good run of games despite his mistakes and the odd benching / pull and was able to grow into the role. That's how a young D should be developed. It's a far smarter management of assets than we've sometimes seen here.
This board and the world seem to agree that the Jets are a team that's going to succeed on the basis of their drafting and development plus the odd savvy trade or moneypuck FA acquisition. If that's the case, then they need to hit on as many prospects as possible and make as few mistakes as possible in their signings. Through the lens of asset management, it's way more efficient to have a Johnny Kovacevic playing sheltered 3rd line minutes for league minimum than to pay Schmidt to do the same for 5.9 mill, even if Schmidt can do some things JK can't. Schmidt on the Nino contract was a smart signing. Schmidt longterm at his salary and caphit wasn't, IMO, although he has played well with several younger players including Samberg of late.
I don't ultimately care if Heinola makes the Jets or doesn't, except insofar as the Jets benefit. But I get a bit tired of the "If prospect X were actually good he'd be playing" argument. There are all kinds of reasons players make it or don't make it. Some of it has to do with skill, effort and coachability but some has to do with team and coach needs and biases, levels of opportunity, luck and so forth. If development can help make a player, it can also screw one up.
