I love the Vegas story. They've been so fun to watch as they give 110% every shift and play as a team. I don't want to see a new team come in and struggle for years like the Wild, Jackets, and Nashville. That's an awful way to try to build a fanbase and sustain teams in unorthodox locations.
And no, the only legit superstar they got was Fleury and even he was a bit of a question mark due to past playoff performances. Look at their original selections and try to tell me they were gifted a playoff team. Every expert pegged them to be in the cellar. Instead, nearly every player they have is having a career year. Apparently, McPhee and his staff looked at a lot of analytics to find players who needed to be given a legit chance in order to succeed. I do think McPhee is a smart guy and good GM minus some bad trades (Forsberg for Erat and high value picks for Tatar). Gallant is also a hell of a coach and has designed a system that suits the team. Every player has bought into it.
Vegas is showing that you don't need a ton of superstars to win and a hardworking, well-disciplined team can go very far. That gives hope for some of the lesser teams in the league. I think that Vegas's success also casts a bad light on other teams' management. Some of the dinosaurs currently in charge are actually paid Vegas to take the players that are currently breaking out. If I was an owner, I would be doing some serious examining to see how I could build a roster the most efficiently with as little of capspace as possible. Get rid of the "old boys club" in management and go with an all-around staff that uses both analytics and game observations. I would also stay away from trying to sign big names in free agency as those contracts hardly ever look good. Instead, sign players for the bottom of the lineup, develop your stars from within, and make trades to fill needs.