No disagreements there. Look at The White Stripes and how lo-fi their success was. But it doesn't say that plug-ins can't be improved upon. Would you rely on a $1500 Yamaha mixing console to mix down the next Foo Fighters CD? They went after an API console, and liked it enough to not only use it for recording, but also for mix-downs. Would you use a $100 dbx EQ vs. an SSL4000 EQ for a vocal? There's subtle differences. Where ethy both provide the same valuable function, the SSL likely has a character of it's own and certainly has some differences in how it EQ's.
 
The EQ that comes with Sonar is very well done, and sounds awesome. But I wouldn't compare Waves Q10 to it. The Q10 is old, outdated, and doesn't have the improved functions of the Sonar EQ.

I think the point Graham is trying to make is not so much that the plugins in DAWs are better.  I doubt anyone would make that argument.  I think he is stressing that the need for some of these plugins would be reduced if there was less to fix in post.  For many of us, the expense of creating a well treated listening environment would likely produce better results than any additional plugin, even if that plugin was superior to what we have. 

Yeah, I'm not too interested in plug ins above what came with my package. The CA2A was a good purchase though and I still want the Concrete Limiter (maybe). What I REALLY want is some Izotope stuff. Ozone and Nectar look like what I need. That and MarkII bass to round out my amp sim collection. If I can't get things sounding okay with all that then I might as well just pack it in.
 
I will be snagging the Melda suite just because it looks like it will be useful and people seem to like it but that's basically free. At this point I think actual hardware would be more helpful than a ton of expensive plugs. I need a nice vocal mic, a Gibby style guit to do the stuff my Strat clone can't and maybe a little 5 watt tube amp (Blues Champ Junior or similar). Maybe a tube mic pre. Oh and a DI box/splitter thingy. All that is way out of my budget as it is.

Yeah, no disagreements. I have a firm belief that the tracking process being right is paramount to a great mix. But I certainly don't believe that's where the expense ends. Even the best photographs in the world need some element of post-processing at the cost of chemicals, dark-room, or Photoshop. Use of the wrong chemicals or cheap Photoshop plug-ins can actually hurt them.
 
Here, use of a low-cost reverb might actually do damage to a great recording. Use of a highly erratic compressor can destroy transients vs. enhance them or thicken them up. Graham is right in every respect and I am splitting hairs here. I'm just emphasizing that sometimes a plug-in will help a recording sound even better. In the case of Sonar, Cakewalk has included some that are profound. I simply suggest that "we" don't take his message into the context that you shouldn't bother with other plug-ins. Just take Graham's approach to buying them.
 
I'll also throw in this last tid-bit. If you see a sale of a plug-in you've been pining for, give it a thought.

br..no disagreement here.  I'm always on the lookout for things that will improve what i already have.

Interesting. It confirms what I have said repeatedly that Sonar Pro comes with all the plugins you need to do a great song. And half of those you don't need.