This is the problem many of us have. This new ownership has been in place 6 months so it appears they are making this move later rather than earlier. Why didn't they fire him months ago? Why wait until the day the owners are ratifying the new CBA, a couple of days before camp?
Asking hypotheticals is a form of you trying to rationalize a firing you don't inherently agree with to fit your narrative. It doesn't change the existence of Burke's tenure here. Similarly, I can do the same thing as you in a contradictory context- Why didn't they fire him and wait until the end of the season? Because he would be a lame-duck GM. Why would they not fire him before the CBA? Perhaps the answer is the exactly the CBA itself, they didn't want to fire him if some uncertainty arised with it, who knows. The point is, this is all speculative and hyothetical, what's the point in concerning ourselves with this petty nonsense when the tenure and results should be the one objective and absolute thing we, as fans, can point to? Leaf fans have some sort if an inferiority complex of sorts (I don't blame them, Leafs have sucked for so long), in which they have to justify everything.
This should be Christmas morning for me and you, instead people are arguing about the firing being unjust with a guy who's had nothing short of a horrendous, net-loss tenure over his four years. It's like leaf fans have been brainwashed into accepting mediocrity.