For USSR, it was not only generals, Stalin also shouldn't have killed scientists, so that USSR was going to invent better tech.

EDIT: I like German army because their technological advancement. I am neither nazi fanboy or neonazi. I dislike Soviet army because their poor training and tech. I like British WW2 army because their great air force, SAS and tactics and I like US army of WW2 because their bombing powers, nukes, technological advancement. I dislike Japanese WW2 army because their lack of technology, bad tactics and bad decisions. I also dislike Italian army of this same war because they had one of worst tech and training. I also dont like France in WW2. Not very great tech, losing too fast, etc. Also I was talking about Germany vs USSR. and my post you link to was just meant to show how good German army was compared to Soviet one. Hitler was one of reasons of losing. Yes, his (and Nazi party's) bad decisions led to hostility between west and Germany, WHICH resulted in western allies doing their job at finishing war, supporting USSR. Germans were not stupid to try to assassinate Hitler. Operation Valkyrie. If this succeeded, and nazis were overthrown, I doubt USSR was going to stop but western allies, with huge possibility, were going to support Germany after that. (One more thing, take look at Operation Unthinkable, British plans and of course check how brilliant general US army had, Patton).

About beating down Red army in their "darkest days", Germany also had dark days in USSR because wrong assault timing and assault directions. For losses, you can check Battle of Kursk. Soviets had more casualties there. Soviets almost all time had more casualties in battles than Germans (Stalingrad, even Moscow, Rzhev pocket, etc). Its very well known fact and you should know that. This breakthrough is just example, nothing else. If you want another good battle, in 1944, check Battle of Tannenberg Line. I cant find any battle where Soviets were badly outnumbered and still won, can you show me at least 3?