I don't think McLellan is a bad coach. All coaches have their biases which cloud their judgment because they develop relationships with players. They have guys they had success playing in certain roles, who, for whatever reason, are no longer successful in those roles, but the coach keeps the guy there out of loyalty. A new coach comes in with no biases and forms their own opinions, seeing things as they are, and make adjustments that are easier to see from the outside looking in. That's why Koskinen is now the starter and Lucic is on the 3rd/4th line.
With the lack of skill and scoring depth on the wings and defense, this roster needed a coach who focuses primarily on playing tight defensive hockey, which is Hitchcock's approach. If the roster was built with more speed and skill outside of the top line, McLellan would be a better person to lead the group than Hitchcock.
Almost every coach at the top of the NHL standings has been fired at least once. Some have tried and failed multiple times. In life, you fail, you learn from your failures, you adapt, and grow. McLellan will be back in the NHL and give himself another opportunity to succeed elsewhere. Same with Eakins. He doesn't have the same quality resume as McLellan and has a longer route to get back to the NHL. Eakins took on the chin, got dropped, picked himself up, dusted himself off, took a step back, and is adopting the lessons he learned to become better at his job, so he can earn another opportunity in the future. I wish both of them much success in the future.