Aww, hell no. If I absolutely had to choose, I'd take the snappiest of the Switch UI over the slow, but pretty Wii U. I just wish there was a middle ground... plus, the Switch eShop is just as slow and less pretty.
Every time I remember trying to access the menu while I was playing the Wii U version of BOTW and trying to get back to the game makes me shudder internally. And now that most Wii U services are down half of the console is just designed around dead services that only work to make everything slower.
Even the handling of BC and VC is questionable. For the former, you had to restart your console just to play Wii games, lacking the snappy Wii-style VC where if you wanted to play a GC game you just put it in and presto!. For the latter, NES, SNES and N64 games look really bad on the Wii U, especially compared to the NSO versions of the same games. And I also disagree on how smaller, more niche releases in NSO are seen like padding while they are seen as hidden gems in the Wii U VC.
I'm not saying there are no good points, but another point he brings is that indie games on Switch aren't really interesting because of the Steam Deck. I think under realistic scrutiny a lot of what he's saying easily falls apart. So while there may be some insights in there, I don't think it comes with much objectivity.
Even setting aside the sales argument, which I wouldn't know why would you set it aside considering that the difference in sales makes the Steam Deck waaay more niche, the two products target a completely different demographic. Does he really think that if you refused to offer the switch, the average joe that just wants to give his children something to play videogames would buy a steam deck, tinker with it, install emulators and going through all the hassle of ensuring every game works perfectly for the device? That is ridiculous.
Focusing on the hardcore minority while turning your back on the majority of your consumer base is not only a horrible business decision, but also a move that would betray the vast majority of your fans, which apparently don't matter to him. As long as he gets to toss them aside in order to make his nostalgia-driven criticism seem valid, that is.
Would you call Luigi's Mansion 3 creative? Or Kirby Star Allies? Or Switch Sports? Mario Kart 8 DX? Splatoon 3? Mario Maker 2? Smash Ultimate? Mario Golf Super Rush?
Out of the games you mentioned, Splatoon 2/3, Mario kart 8DX+DLC, Mario maker 2, Smash Ultimate and Luigi's mansion 3 are huge step-ups from its predecessors both in content and quality, even if people disagree with some details. Yes, they are creative because they managed to do things that their predecessors didn't, even if the predecessor laid the foundation. Same thing applies for other games you didn't mention, like Metroid Dread, Pikmin 4.
And even besides that I think BOTW/TOTK, Mario Odyssey, Pokemon Legends Arceus, Pokemon SV (sans the bugs), ARMS, Ring Fit adventure, Labo are extremely creative and none of those relied on earlier games nor were sequels. I love 3D world to hell and back, but Mario Odyssey is in another league with regards to creativity and grandeur. And no 3DS Pokemon game is as creative gameplay wise as Legend Arceus, in fact, it's the biggest shakeup of the pokemon formula since forever.