I think we've seen Blashill develop right alongside some of his players. I think he's better than he was when he first came to Detroit.
Remembering that, since they sold at the deadline last season, he now doesn't have much to work with in terms of talent, or not as much, I don't really blame him for where the team is at now. In fact, I think the Wings are ahead of where most predictions placed them. I don't see how you justify arguments against him until the inverse becomes true.
I've seen a lot of unorthodox methods for coaching hockey teams, and some times those methods have been frustratingly confusing, but a lot of times I've also seen guys with different approaches get a hockey team to work despite causing frustration and confusion. So, I don't care about method so much as performance.
This was a team that was supposed to look like crap and have their heads down all season. We haven't seen that. At worst, I think you can say they've lacked consistency but have still performed slightly better than expected. Coaching does factor into that.
Remember that they've even missed some significant pieces (like Dekeyser and Athansiou) through relatively large portions of the season so far. I'm not saying those guys are going to be Hall of Famers, but they are significant pieces for this Wings team right now. This is a Wings team which, by all rights, shouldn't be able to lose anything in terms of depth and still be capable of achieving anything remotely approaching success. Yet, although they've been streaky, they've toughed it out pretty well. They're even getting contributions from veterans, who speculation and rumor suggest, aren't supposed to like playing for Blashill. So, I don't see justification.
They could bring aboard the winning-est coach in hockey history right now if they could get him drunk enough, but I doubt you'd see much of difference in the standings at this phase of rebuilding.