If I was asked by an NHL team if it thought a potential draft pick had done the work to earn a second chance, and they showed me this letter, I would say no. Second chances, for me, are a result of the work done in the name of accountability.

https://bit.ly/2HDPtdc 

You can make arguements for cancelling someone in perpetuity but eventually, we're all going to be cancelled. But there's a nuanced position between "everyone deserves the opportunity to redeem themselves" and "we have to forgive people for past mistakes".

The expectation likely should require effort on the front end to grow and demonstrate that growth. Reward before effort is not a recipe for success.

What I see in the letter is language that lessens his responsibility for his actions and the seriousness of them, erasure of the victim, highlighting actions of what he's done, not what he's learned, and a commitment to the coyotes, not to those who would benefit from his work.

If your perspective is that harmful actions preclude you from earning privileges later on, that's the train of thought that justifies capital punishment. Everyone should have an avenue back from
their mistakes, but the bigger the mistake, the higher the bar is for forgiveness.

I don't see the required growth or accountability in this letter to conclude he's done the work to earn his redemption. I hope I'm wrong and the coyotes know more than I do, because high level hockey is not, historically, the environment that's corrected these behavious.