I feel like a useful distinction to make when talking about nepotism is
"I have worked with this guy before and he gives great result so of course I want to work with him again"
and
"I know this guy who needs a job, what have we got he can do"
I don't think anyone much kvetched about Hextall bringing in Chris Pryor, which is Exhibit A. We're all used to it and on some level, most of us approve of it because chemistry and cohesive organisational philosophies matter. It's no different from wishing we could trade for guys who did well with Sid in international play, right? Same way nobody went mad when Rutherford hired Vellucci.
Then you have Nick Pryor being appointed Director of Amateur Scouting and we're starting to get into Column B. Yeah, guy had been a scout for 8 years and had been working with Hextall in that time, but it's a little sus to name your guy's son as your guy. Particularly when your named you own son as a development coach, your former team mate's son who's just finished playing as a pro scout, your own minor league coach and former team mate as head of pro scouting... what does a team with four pro scouts need a director for anyway?
Dubas didn't know Spezza until five years ago. He owed the guy nothing when he put him straight into the front office after he retired. There is a clearly a "who you know" element to Dubas bringing him here, but it's a Column A nepotism. It's the sort where it's expected and if you believe in the guy you hired, you believe in the guys he believes in, right?
Now if in a few months all aspects of the Pens org are just guys from Toronto, guys from the Greyhounds, guys related to those guys getting promotions, then there's an issue... but on its own, I wouldn't really argue the nepotism angle, but it's not a bad thing here.
In any case, it's very easy to believe in a long time hockey guy with a reputation for being a massive hockey nerd and beloved leader.