I am far more cautious when it comes this sentiment. I think change has just as good a likelihood of being disappointing.
Lots of Shite GMs out there, very few who have been successful. None have been successful without missteps along the way, and the current successful guys are employed.
If you operate from a perspective of hating the current management group, then any change must look good. Personally I love the team being built, love the squad on the ice, and that’s the deciding factor when it comes to evaluating the architect. I am concerned that a new outsider has just as much change of screwing up what has been clearly moving on the right direction as they are of making it better.
I also don’t see a team that has stagnated or taken steps backwards that needs a new direction from the top. When I perceive the team looking this way I will agree that change may be needed. For now it just looks like EM era hate still brewing underneath powering a drive for change when it’s not really needed.
Do like I do and get blocked by everyone so it’s just the two of us in here arguing back and forth.