Rebuilding is a very hit and miss strategy. Banking on mediocre players to win a Cup is a very miss and miss strategy.
Now while all the suggestions you offered would indeed help the roster, what about the last 5-7 years indicates that any of them will be successfully executed? Holland talks a great game every summer, but has failed to land any elite talent via draft, trade, or free agency in a decade, so why do you feel the near future will be any different?
I'd share your sentiments if I saw more evidence, but when the has-beens keep being added to the roster, and the kids rarely amount to first line talent, I don't see how this approach will EVER yield anything better than early playoff cannon fodder.
We aren't garnering any Elite talent this year that isn't already on the roster. That much is clear. Our biggest problem is at the back end. Sort that and the team is suddenly a contender. And the evidence is that as many emerge in the positions we draft at as earlier. We've not done that well enough over the last decade for sure.
We can improve by trading, although not as much as we like. We have few top level assets, but an excess of numbers. The circumstances increase the necessity of trading more than in recent years. If KH doesn't make a trade this year and the team is still as lost as it was for much of last year, I'll happily join those suggesting he should step aside. The last two years, and the next two will define whether this team is nearer the bottom of its decline or only just started.
As for a full rebuild, we just aren't bad enough yet, even without the FA signings. There would have to be a major firesale because we are still closer to being a playoff team than a top 5 pick team. And I'd rather my team try to do as well as it can every year until it gets to the point where a full rebuild is inevitable. Because the best rebuilds are those that happen very quickly with 2 or 3 top 5 picks in a row or multiple picks in strong drafts before bouncing out of the doldrums. Otherwise you end up like the Oliers or all those teams that were awful for most of the late 90s-mid 2000s. As things stand, the Oilers are likely to win a cup before us, but not by that much, and they have been awful for so long to get to this point, and have still been massively fortunate to get the lottery picks they have.
Pittsburgh was the luck (fix?!) of Crosby and Malkin back to back, and snagging Letang, after years of being awful.
The Blackhawks management has been great, but It was getting the #1 overall in Kane and the good fortune of Keith in the second round that has defined that franchise. But they were a joke for a decade or more.
Similar with the kings, but they were more organic (ie less totally reliant on lengthy tanks, same as the Bruins).
Either way, the point is, the same people who think our GM is incompetent and our ownership misguided seem to think the same people can guide the Wings through a record time re-build.
I can understand the feeling that you have to go on a big rebuild to be successful looking at the centre-pieces of the recent SC winning rosters, but its easy to forget just how long those teams were truly laughably awful for. And how many top 15 picks they had that barely made an impact on those franchises.
A rebuild for new shiny toys seems a great idea if you can convince yourself it can be a 3 year task, but the evidence is that unless you get lucky enough to get top 3 picks a few times on the bounce, it can take well over a decade, and that's even ignoring the annual race to the bottom that the cap era has given us. And not one of those teams that has genuinely successfully undergone a rebuild was as good as the wings were even before their FA signings.
We're just not bad enough to throw it away yet. We may well be in 2-3 years if recent decisions don't pan out. If so, great.
