There's a difference between well-founded speculation and your writing out narrative that you can't give any evidence to support. Opinions can be wrong and shitty, it doesn't protect you from responses and disagreement
I've given several arguments in support of my position. To summarize:
1. We took on Laine for free just last offseason and his value hasn't changed since then. The information hasn't changed, except for the fact that he has one year remaining on his contract instead of two, and he has a major knee injury under his belt. He's still slow, still really bad defensively, ineffective at even strength, still has an elite shot and is a weapon on the powerplay. On this point the burden of proof is on you to show that his value
has increased. And it can, as was the case with Monahan. But nothing has changed between the time Laine was acquired for free and now to think that his value has changed.
2. Because of his player profile and contract, he's a roster construction nightmare. He makes too much to play on lower lines, creates matchup vulnerabilities 5-5 if he's playing on the top lines. There is no need for a contender to introduce those conditions to a successful team at the TDL.
3. The market is extremely limited for a player like Laine. We were uniquely positioned to take a gamble on him in the offseason given our cap situation and need to inject that kind of talent onto the roster. It was a gamble that we could afford to take, but that set of circumstances is rare. Limited market = limited value.
I'm all for disagreement, but that's not what you're doing here. You haven't addressed a single point I've made. Instead you're blanket dismissing, which makes me wonder why you bother to respond in the first place.
If you disagree with any of the above, please feel free to do so.