Who is talking about guaranteed success or failure? There's no guarantee that I wouldn't be a great GM but I don't see you talking about hiring me. Devine would obviously be a more reasonable hire than Gretzky because he has actually proven he can work in an NHL front office and has proven his ability to handle various front office tasks like scouting and drafting, which he has done a good job with.
Wayne Gretzky failing as a coach doesn't "prove" he would be a bad GM, it just doesn't say much for his supposed brilliant mind as it pertains to not being a player. There is literally nothing positive to say about Gretzky as a potential GM. Name one thing that indicates he might succeed? The only thing anyone can say is that he was a great player. When has Gretzky even said anything insightful about hockey? Have you heard the guy's interviews? His future in hockey is being a completely bland 'ambassador'.
As to your last point, it's just so clearly wrong. There's no guarantee someone with front office experience would do a better job than someone with no experience. It is, however, in fact far more likely that someone who actually understands how to work in an NHL front office would have success than someone who has no experience. Far more likely.
There are only two possible outcomes to the new hire, success and failure. You can feel more comfortable with the hire because you've seen him perform aspects of the job in other roles but the odds of him succeeding are not any greater. SO it is not FAR more likely or even more likely at all.
You say there is "nothing positive to say about Gretzky as a potential GM" and I disagree. Not only has he been part owner of a franchise he was also the Executive Director of the Canadian National Team that won Gold. Not to mention the positive impact of his presence of potential free agents and the improved perception of Buffalo and the Sabres by his hiring that I have already expressed.
Besides failing as a coach that is irrelevant and not having been a GM before (which most candidates have not) what is there to say negative about him?
I am perfectly fine with them hiring an AGM and think we MAY be better off with them making the day-to-day decisions for the club, but I also say maybe not. And they can't offer any intangible benefits to the likes of Gretzky. If Darcy signs Parise and Suter, as he apparently tried to, he probably looks like a genius and we are contending right now with him as GM instead of looking for a new one to run our rebuild. If you hire Botterill As an example, no top free agents are going to consider us unless we overpay or luck into McDavid or another prospect emerges to an elite level and we are cup contenders again. Even then the perception about Buffalo is negative enough to push people away. I truly believe Gretzky gives us a leg up in this area and will make people consider coming here you will Never have with Botterill, Fenton, etc... If the Sabres draft no. 1 or 2 in the next two drafts that will have more to do with the teams turnaround then who they hire as GM. Is Shero a great GM because he has Crosby and Malkin?
In Crosby's draft the Sabres had the same odds as Pittsburgh in getting No. 1 overall. If Pittsburgh and Buffalo switch positions, I bet Pittsburgh doesn't have as much success picking from Zagrapan, Pokoluk, O'Marra, and Bourrett. After Malkin were Barker, Ladd, Wheeler, Montoya, and Olesz.
Maybe a monkey couldn't do it, but any human with a functioning brain and a pulse can be advised to select Reinhardt and McDavid and look like a genius. There will be depth and team building moves and picks to be done but signing or drafting elite players is usually the keys to success in the NHL these days. Devine can handle the draft and Gretzky improves our chances with the free agents More than Botterill and the like.
