Yes the answer is always hybrid. But of course it depends on the scope and scale of the project. By all means use an Agile sprint method or scrum organisation structure to deliver key and core work packages, but on large multi stage development projects and programmes, these need to sit under a waterfall stage driven structure because it gives the Sponsors, Programme board, PEs and other steering group rerpresentatives the comfort that the programme has a clearly defined structure and approach, and because looking at a large project in high level stages, and being able to track key milestones against those stages is how it works for those seniors whose necks are on the blocks to influence and deliver.
Let the PM manage the project, and let the scrum-master or whichever unfortunate has been nominated to make it work, manage the work package driven sprints. All of which sits beneath the key stage plan.
The guy in the article claiming some mutual exclusivity of methods obviously isn't delivering change projects to the size and scale that a lot of PMs do (or maybe he just has a lumberjack shirt and a beard and makes it all up as he goes along?)
If you have staff that treat your corporate systems as their own, and refuse to adapt to new methods - then they need to be released. You will feel some pain but in the long term that issue should have been identified, and be actively managed with a contingency plan.
It's not rocket science. It's really really isn't.