Jack Johnson shouldn't be playing over Juuso Riikola.
Sam Lafferty shouldn't be playing over Evan Rodrigues.
It's wholly plausible, as well, that Matt Murray shouldn't be playing over Tristan Jarry.
But let this one really rancid result, the Penguins' 5-2 flogging by the Capitals on this Saturday afternoon at PPG Paints Arena, rise above all other examples for why it's ridiculous to single out minutiae like third-pairing defensemen, fourth-line forwards or even the goaltender, the casual fan's scapegoat of choice.
"They played hard. Give them credit," Marcus Pettersson observed of the opponent. "But we made a lot of mistakes, a lot of unforced plays that gave them opportunities."
Yep. Don't overthink it. And definitely don't focus on the fringe.
Here's all one needs to know about what happened here ...
Following the dismal first period, one in which Washington took two-thirds of the shot attempts at five-on-five, 12-6, and dominated the high-danger chances, 5-1, the Penguins retook the ice following intermission with nearly two full minutes on the clock. Sure looked like the leaders were ready to lead.
So here was the first shift taken by the top line of Sidney Crosby, Jason Zucker and Conor Sheary, backed by the top pairing of Kris Letang and Brian Dumoulin:
Hey, other than two glaring giveaways and a T.J. Oshie clanger off the bar, what's not to like?
Wait, this was their next shift, same five guys:
Don't skip that video. Watch it all.
Then remember it the next time there's a temptation to fuss over stuff that's totally trivial by comparison, like Johnson's lingering ineffectiveness, Lafferty's lapse on the opening goal or Murray being victimized for a handful in his third consecutive start.
Seriously, if setting aside the Senators and Sabres, the seven losses among the Penguins' past nine games have seen the following contributions from the Penguins' most gifted forward and most gifted defenseman: Crosby's had two goals, one assist and a minus-9 rating. Letang's had one assist, a team-worst 11 giveaways and, on this day alone, a minus-4 rating.
Malkin's been steady overall, with four goals in those seven games. But the power play, for which he, Crosby and Letang are principally responsible, has gone 2 for 22. Including the latest five-on-three absurdity, that saw one bleeping puck put on Braden Holtby.
Oh, and then this on the Penguins' power play to open the third:
Carl Hagelin's still trying.
Go ahead and frame the gorgeous goals in Buffalo, cook up the chili for the hat trick against Ottawa, and this still holds true: The Penguins haven't been the best version of themselves, meaning the pre-Christmas version, since the stars returned en masse.
Coincidence?
Well, view it another way: Even if the stars were all producing, they couldn't possibly be accused of leading effectively.
I asked Malkin if it was easier for Penguins to play their style when they're missing players, and his response was striking.
"Yeah, when we had a couple injuries, everybody stepped up," he'd reply without hesitation. "But with everyone back, everyone healthy, we think like, ‘Oh, there’s so much skill. It's going to be easy. We're going to score on every shift.' We need to step up."
He'd been looking down as he spoke, but now he looked up at me.
"You're right. When we had five or six guys hurt, we played so much better. It's a little bit hard to understand right now. Maybe it's the same like me, like Sid, like everybody should play better. We need, like, the new guys who come in, like, step up. We need to talk a little bit more."
Ouch. Lots to unpack there, not least of which was the suggestion that the recent trade acquisitions still require some level of assimilation.
Still, it was acknowledgement. It was something. As was this from Patric Hornqvist, another leader:
But I'm not nearly as certain how to read the captain in the moment.
This legitimately isn't cause for panic, but that's only because of the Penguins' place in the Eastern standings -- earned by their harder-working predecessors in the first half of the season -- and because 15 games remain, including another Sunday afternoon against the Hurricanes. There isn't a ton of time, but there's time.
Still, it feels like there's cause for more than how Crosby assessed a first period in which the Penguins were run off the rink: "We just chased one mistake with another one. I think our compete was there. We just made some bad reads. Against a team like that, they’re not going to miss chances like those."
Yeah, no. My respect for Crosby overflows, but I didn't see anywhere near sufficient 'compete.' And I can either run through all that data again, or simply show this Washington goal in which every single gold sweater appears to be in stasis:
Hey, wait, that's Johnson out there! This was all on him!
No, really, the solutions here have to come from within. And by that I mean within the room. Mike Sullivan can blast his boys into oblivion, and it won't make a difference without the right players demonstrating the buy-in rather than simply voicing it. Not with the group as currently constituted.
If anything, it might actually hurt if Sullivan takes it too far, judging by how calmly he appeared to take this one.
"We’ve got capable people. We’ve got the depth that we need," was as close as he'd come to criticism. "It’s more about collective effort, playing the right way and attention to detail. We’ve got to make better decisions."
And on all the odd-man breaks allowed, "I think it was a case where we duplicated jobs in some of the wrong areas of the rink. We got caught into the piles and, as a result, we didn't support one another."
Yuck. Nothing at all like how Sullivan seethed when the damaged Penguins would have a rare letdown.
I much preferred this from Malkin: "We have everything to win. ... But we, like, look at each other. We try to play easy. It’s not our game.”
It didn't used to be.
• Blaming the early faceoff is equally misguided. The Penguins are now 4-3-1 in matinees this season.
• Blaming the coaches, on the other hand, I'm completely comfortable in that realm. Every coach at every level will claim responsibility for his or her team's preparedness, so Sullivan's part of this. But within that, the power play's gone 1 for 14 against Washington this season, and that's the specific domain of Mark Recchi. When it's a broader issue -- which it is, obviously -- that's one thing. When it's team-on-team and, thus, scheme-on-scheme, that's even tougher to take.
• Lafferty over Rodrigues ... I get it, given that Lafferty scored a beauty in D.C. last month. But maybe this wasn't the time and place. Lafferty has a long way to go defensively, and he was the clear F3 in allowing Dowd to score the first of his two goals.
• Murray didn't lose the game, and he obviously didn't win the game, either. He wasn't a factor.
What does bug me about Sullivan handing him a third consecutive start was that it reeks of precisely what I'd hoped he'd avoid, which was steering this whole scene toward a predetermined conclusion. It's as if Murray was going to be the playoff starter no matter what, and all else we've witnessed this winter from Tristan Jarry was little more than providing that 'push' that Sullivan has acknowledged Murray needs.
I'd still welcome being wrong about this. Because it'd be unfair not only to Jarry but also all concerned if the Penguins aren't going with their bona fide best goaltender when it matters most, whether that's Murray or Jarry.
Let's see how Jarry answers Sunday. Could be fun to see if he can force the coach's hand.
• Anyone seen Brandon Tanev?
Not the one who's barely visible these days, unless he's getting cleanly barreled onto his backside by Ilya Kovalchuk, of all people. But the one who was doing all that barreling, both in Winnipeg and then for the first couple months of his arrival in Pittsburgh. He was credited with six hits here, though I can't recall a solitary one, and two takeaways, while going without a goal for the 20th time in 21 games.
Teddy Blueger hasn't been a whole lot better of late, which makes me wonder two things:
1. Is Zach Aston-Reese underappreciated?
2. Are they spent from the first half?
• The Capitals are more vulnerable than I'd realized, particularly on the back end with Brenden Dillon, Nick Jensen and Jonas Sieghenthaler making up half their defense corps. But they also very clearly elevate against the Penguins, as there were scant signs of their two-month .500 funk through this one.
"I think the win means a lot, but I think the way we played means more," Oshie would say. "Obviously, we give up a couple there late, but from the top all the way down, everyone had the same effort tonight. When we're working that way, we're going to be hard to beat."
• Alexander Ovechkin had no points, no shots, and he's gone through three games of the season series against the Penguins without a point. Which only underscores all that Washington's got up front.
• If you'd bet on the NHL to be the first professional sports league to use the coronavirus as an excuse to bar reporters from the locker room, you win. Imagine that being the very first reaction to this very real threat.
• Which is fine by me, incidentally. I don't want whatever they had.
PHOTO GALLERY
Penguins vs. Capitals, March 7, 2020, PPG Paints Arena. - GETTY