This is going to be another point of disagreement, but this is the $64000 question: Is Lickliter to be completely excused of all responsibility for "1/3 of his roster walking out the door" and just chalk it up to his being dealt a bad hand? Or should he be held to SOME sort of standard to work with what he has rather than trying to fit square pegs into round holes, and keep players in the program? You could just as easily argue that Lickliter nudged a lot of these players out the door because they weren't his type of players. Freeman for example. At the time, the talk I heard sounded like it was basically "Play my way or you don't play. It doesn't matter that you just led the team in scoring."
This team is young, inexperienced, and has no depth, because for one reason or another, Lickliter has been unabled to retain the players necessary to have upperclassmen, and the depth you speak of. This factor, and the transfers, go hand-in-hand IMO. You have to either blame Lickliter for both, or excuse him for both. Clearly, you are in the latter camp, I am in the former.
Regarding expectations for this year - I understand what you are saying, but low expectations still don't excuse poor results, do they? What if this is happening two years from now and the team still is expected to be bad? There comes a point where we have to stop saying "Well, we all knew the team would be awful this year, so don't be upset because that's what is happening." The question is: At what point should that be?