Obviously when the rules demand "possession" it is intentionally meant to be different from merely touching the puck. Possession means being in control of the pucks movements*, not any haphazard bounches going the player's team's way.
* They wouldn't have happened to define 'possession' in the rulebook?
There's a document out there called the 'official rule interpretations for referees' or somesuch that the referees get every year, and that's where terms like possession are defined with examples. I've seen it pop up in the past, but I don't think the NHL intentionally makes it available to the public. That's where you get visibly injured=blood for high sticking calls and things like that as well. In the past, the NHL has used possession=touch to have a very black and white standard on this rule, but it did kill a lot of chances where a defending player would brush the puck without actually being able to control it, so they tweaked the interpretation to come closer to the original intent at the expense of a little bit of objective clarity. You don't sacrifice much clarity, though, the whining is just sour grapes. It's not really a hard standard to figure out. As for Trotz's contention, if it deflects out off of Orpik's stick it's not supposed to be a delay of game, since that isn't considered to be possession. Pucks deflecting out of play off defensemen happens all the damn time without penalties getting called- Trotz is full of shit on that one.
And it has gone against us as well, there have been a couple instances where other teams have gotten very good chances after we touched pucks without getting possession, though I don't remember if any have turned into goals. Given the nature of some of our games this season, I'm sure it's happened. I'm not bothered by it at all, the change makes the game a lot better.