I don't think many people do genuinely think he's a horrifically awful bottom 3 GM in the league, but I just don't understand how anyone can look at his tenure and think it's been good enough that he should stick around. The fact that the GMOTY and Jack Adams awards are just a who made the 2nd round unexpectedly award does not mean that there's no way to evaluate a GM's decision making, especially someone who's been around for 10 years. It's just simply time for a change, no he is not a horrendous terrible GM that ruined everything forever, but "not terrible" is not good enough.
This is now the 3rd time in his tenure (and would be the fourth without the covid bubble playoffs) where we're tanking while he intended to compete. 15-16 and 17-18 were both intended to be playoff years, and this year they traded a 1st round pick for a 2-3C and spent to the cap with the goal of being at worst a bubble team in the 85+ point range, but we're already trending towards a bottom five finish. Why should he get to stick around for the third top-10 pick after years where he intended to compete? He just has no vision beyond "get to the playoffs and see what happens", so I do not want him in charge of another franchise defining "retool" or whatever it'll be branded as this time.
Even if we fired him and ended up with a GM of the same overall quality or a little worse, that would still be a net positive because at the very least you would be making mediocre decisions towards a different philosophy. If the new guy sucks but really values offence or really values physicality at the very least we would be adding some new stylistic element or identity to the team which would be better in aggregate complementing the existing players.