Translation: you don't have any examples. Because it would have taken you substantially less time to simply list them than it has for you to type up numerous posts about why you aren't giving any. Have fun yelling.
Your position seems to be that unless someone can provide concrete examples of players that were available, trades that almost definitely would go through, and would almost certainly improve the team, they shouldn't complain.
That's an absurd expectation. At the time who would've predicted that Holland could get Stuart from the Kings for a 2nd and 4th pick? Or taking the Kings as an example, who would've thought they'd get Richards for Simmonds, Schenn and a pick? Or trade a defenseman they'd recently signed long term to bring in Carter? And that both of those trades would be huge factors in their Cup win?
It's likely you would've shot down all of those trades as unrealistic or wouldn't improve the team. But who the hell knows until they actually happen?
If I could provide those kind of examples beforehand, I'd take Holland's friggin job. I'm not complaining because I think he sucks. I'm complaining because I think he's one of the best GM's in the NHL, so he better be able to come up with some moves that the average fan couldn't know about.
It's awful hard to provide irrefutable evidence for a trade that didn't happen. That doesn't mean I can't be unhappy with what Holland is saying and doing. For now I'm withholding full judgment until the summer is over. But Lidstrom retiring is something he and management should've started planning for 10 years ago. Looking at our blueline right now, it sure doesn't feel like they did.
Your position seems to be that if Holland made the move, it was the right one. If he didn't, it wouldn't have made the team better or it would've cost too much. The only thing I've heard you complain about regarding Holland was Ericsson, which you were wrong about.