I'M just going to avoid commenting on your analogy, to be polite, and just ask yourself this question....What has this team proved to you under his leadership? What did Molson do? What were his credentials to begin with? And if he didn'T need credentials to be an owner, how about recognizing from the start that you don't know hockey and name a president of hockey operations. Instead of asking your GM to autoevaluate himself on the great job he's doing.....
The team proved nothing but then again I wouldn't expect any other GM to have done better with what we had. It looked great on paper but in reality it was a mirage. I'm waiting to see what they can do when they actually build the team from scratch, and I like very much what I'm seeing, now that Timmins got his head out of his ass and started scoring on most of his top picks. Bergevin is an ace trader, holy I wouldn't want my team to trade AGAINST him.
Anyway, I like that Molson kept Bergevin against an hurricane of winds. He was under immense pressure to fire him and he kept the stability. I like that he's a local too, and to be honest I kindda have a natural sympathy for the guy too, something you can't really explain.
It is far from perfect but few are. I think they're a strong management team compared to what is around the league. Have to judge based on the cards dealt. The cards looked good so he went on a few streets but ultimately he realized he'd lose the hand so he mucked and reshuffled.
Slightly off-topic, but That's why I maintain my "homerun theory" for draft picks. You only need to score 1 or 2 or 3 of those and it changes everything, so you must aim for those and not pick "safe picks" all the time. That's how teams reset quickly.