Well maybe this is why we're all disagreeing.
When you read Culture: you think we're talking about bringing in Lucic or Ference at the detriment of skill.
When I write Culture: I'm talking about our team, telling EACH OTHER, that it is NOT OK to lose the puck at the opponent's blue line. It's not ok to take the time to slam your stick or roll your eyes when you've/we've lost the puck... just get skating, period,... and we'll bail each other out.
There are only three ways to change culture:
1) Coaching, we've tried that many times, it hasn't worked
2) Bring in guys who've played in more positive situations to support our younger players, that are either
a) skilled
b) veterans who play both sides of the puck
3) Wait for our younger players to grow up and mature as hockey players
MacT/Chia tried to do #2b, but he failed because i) the guys he brought in didn't have enough skill left in them to command the room from a leadership perspective and ii) he didn't bring enough depth with them. I'd argue that the first year Lucic was hear, the culture was changing... but then with Sekera out and Larsson and Klef injured, we struggled, and guys individually slipped back into bad habits.
I'd want the new GM to focus on bringing in a QUANTITY of players that can fill both 2a that are also 2b. If we bring in a bunch of 20 year olds that are 2a I can predict that we will not change our culture... we need the infusion of leadership that 2b can bring (in support of the talent we ALREADY have). But if we bring in 2b that can't play anymore (Ference types) then the culture won't change because our guys aren't listening to coaches, or pseudo-coaches. It has to be guys that can lead by example on the ice.
If those of you screaming "skill breeds winning, winning breeds culture" actually think that a bunch of skilled ELC kids will right this ship, you are doomed to allowing history to repeat itself AGAIN.