Again there is a lot of context you skipIn the off-season last year how many D did they sign? Or how many D did they move? After saying they were a few pieces away from making the playoffs, they didn't do anything to the D to fix it, instead went after forwards. It wasn't until just before the season started they then made a trade to aquire Stillman. Season started they sucked JR again went on about structure, then they made another trade and grabbed Bear the guy they had their eye on for months. Things didn't change they still sucked, then JR again went on about structure, and this one comment he made was a little weird.
It's a weird comment, because he's saying if the structure was right it doesn't matter who the D are, but in his mind the structure isn't strong enough so he now has to fix the D because of the coaching structure, but it still shows he didn't feel the D needed to be fixed It's all structure. So to answer your question yes I do believe they thought the D was good enough, it was all about structure in their eyes.
But honestly last summer.. how realistic was it to move who we needed to move. Oel and myers with 2 yrs left? Its not a shock that they couldnt
And he is half right with the structure piece - do you thjnk its a fluke a bunch of ahlers and ncaa ufas and myers actually held respectively with a structured system - but that doesnt default like you frame it to good enough. Remembwr penguins in 2017 their defence core cause letang was hurt. They were average on paper but played with a structure that suited them
Thats the point
You also need to see what you have before labelling everyone - last year say dman X played poorly under boudreaus mess but then in more stucture under tocchet dman X plays quite adequately because he has help. When you take a star player out of the equation you need to figure out who plays how and how to help them collectively..
It is not as black and white as you shoot it