There is no soundbite or quote coming directly from the horse's mouth in this instance. There is an article which you can use to read between the lines.
Quote from his father “We’ve told [the Canucks] he’s going to go back to school for another year". TOLD THEM. Implies that there was a choice given and a decision made.
Quote from Gilman “Education is an important thing and if he wants to stay for another year of school, that’s a good thing,”. IF. Implies there was a choice given and a decision made.
SOMEONE in the Canucks management (and you have to presume it was MG since he manages the team) must have given him a choice - stay in college, or play for Everett. My point is that if MG/Canucks brass were totally happy with the Minnesota system, they would have just told him to go back there. The fact that they gave him the option to play in the WHL instead infers (to me and many others) that they would have preferred him to play in the WHL, but that it was totally his choice. I don't think it is illogical inference.
It is exactly like the Connaughton situation - Connaughton was given the choice of staying in college or joining the Giants - but instead of deciding for himself he told the press that he'd go wherever the Canucks management told him to play and he ended up playing in the WHL. Even though I don't have a soundbite or quote of MG saying "I would prefer Kevin to play in the WHL rather than in college because we think it will be better for his development", it is a fact that that is what he and his staff decided.