No, you're embarrassing yourself with your binary approach to player evaluation. You're basically saying that players are either bad, and should be criticized with flamboyant and erratic statements that can't be supported (but it doesn't matter because they're bad!) or players are good, and should never, in any circumstances, have any part of their game scrutinized even when they have a bad couple of seasons in a row.
That's what people are finding childish and taking issue with. Saying that Brodie didn't need to drag Engelland around like a boat anchor in order to make that pairing effective is neither "****ting on" Brodie nor heaping undeserved praise on Engelland. Saying that Brodie didn't play the type of hockey where he could carry someone around last year isn't "****ting on" Brodie, either. Saying that Engelland, whose team has missed the playoffs exactly once in his 9-year NHL career, and whose team just made the Cup final with him in the top 4, was as effective as a corpse, is by far the silliest statement made in this discussion.
If you're wondering why the people you're talking to are supporting Engelland and criticizing Brodie, it's because you're acting too down on Engelland and too high on Brodie. If you said Engelland is a top 3 defenceman and letting him go was a mistake and that Brodie should be on the bottom pairing only, you'd be hearing the opposite. It's all down to you.