Because we're all aware of it already, and our previous levels of suckitude wouldn't be brought up if certain posters didn't pretend it was an unprecedented level of suck from this team which is only a few seasons removed from a 56 point season while openly pining for the previous regime. They also ignore the context of mitigating circumstances as Sniper listed.
We were 8-15-5 last year on 8 Dec. That's BEFORE the nine game losing streak later in the month stretching into January.
We're only 7-18-4 behind that right now, even INCLUDING the horrific goaltending/start.
So I'm still confused on how this is the worst hockey ever seen, considering the level of compete from a club under new staff, horrific goaltending, young players being integrated on the fly, injuries to the blue line and starter, etc, etc.
The team shows up for more than 20 minutes a night. Special teams look better than they did last year. Many stats like the chances for/against, unsustainably low PDO, etc bear out that this is and has been a better club than the record indicates. I never thought last year's club was better than second worst, and that's where they sat in the standings for 90% of the season. Looking at the underlying stats, I'd say we're essentially the middle of the pack team we've seen and been since picking up a decent back up goaltender.
Or we could pretend the sky is still falling, and year 6 of Tippett missing the playoffs was the answer we missed when he "quit."
What don't you understand about the simple fact that our overall talent level (not just at the NHL level) had been piss-poor for a significant time between 2014 and really, last year? What mitigating circumstances have been missed, or is that your way of trying to say that we don't pay attention, when in reality, you are the one who is misinterpreting mitigating circumstances? We could just as easily have said that up through the month of December last year, our goalie performed at the exact level of Domingue, for whatever reason, but it was immediately put on the coach.
If you are arguing that the team has more time that they are "up" for the game - sure, why not? I don't distinctly see any difference in the level of compete last year vs this year. Maybe that is the up and down system telling you that the team is competing more, but if the results have been on the side of poor to mediocre with a sprinkle of positives in there, I don't see how a definitive conclusion can be made that the team is "showing up moreso and significantly moreso than last year."
Considering how everyone acted last year, we had horrific goaltending last year, so what is the difference? We had some young players integrated on the fly, but was Tippett correct or incorrect in sending Strome back to the OHL (he was correct in that) or keeping Crouse up (while some have discussed the merits of him improving offense in Kingston, the truth of the matter is that b/c of his size, speed, ability, etc. it would be the equivalent of putting a senior on a freshman team - he would get better at some things, but would not be challenged enough). We have had plenty of injuries over the years (not just blue-line specific).
That's where I am saying why is Tocchet essentially getting the benefit of the doubt due to injury and shitty play, when the same thing could be said last year: Domi went out with his broken hand right about this time, and he was our best F, outside of Vrbata. Duclair at least deserved to get benched last year, given how he was playing. This isn't an excuse, but the same way the goalie injury thing is discussed, why is it that you conveniently ignore injuries as relates to last year's squad? Why do you conveniently ignore that Perlini got brought up the same way that Strome was this year: start in the A, work hard and grow, and then eventually you get your time? But it is praised when Tocchet and his staff does that, but for Tippett, he is looked at as incompetent, regardless.
I don't in any way think that last year's club was playoff caliber, but to that point, I also don't think they were the second worst club, either. Much the same as this club this year. More talent, but less experience means we probably are about the same team as last year, maybe with more growth potential, but also more possible mistakes to iron out (as evidenced by our first 20 games). I don't think that our team is as bad as the record indicates, but to blatantly state that this team is further ahead of where they were at last year is questionable at best, and laughable at worst - depends on how much further ahead you consider this team to be. I see a little progress ahead in certain areas, but a lack of progress in others. Maybe a hair better, but I think that is born of the increased talent that we are finally able to see on the roster. Imagine how much better this team may have been with Strome and Crouse being able to play in the A last year and compete against pros more consistently, with Crouse getting to play against pros last year, but not much consistency arriving.
That's where I feel like there is this jaded belief that we are ahead of where we are last year by leaps and bounds, but at least some of that would have shown up earlier in the year. I think we are slightly better, but regardless of who the coach is, we are a below average team. Maybe we would be far worse with Tippett in charge (I doubt that). Maybe we would be far better with Tippett in charge (I also doubt we would be far better, but I think we would be trending slightly better).
) I was just laying out the motives for the OP instead of having everyone guess 
