I Can't Figure Out What Pittsburgh Stood To Gain From Starting Marc-Andre Fleury

KILLORN WITH THE BLAST! #PITvsTBL pic.twitter.com/IxtOvRDbFP

— Hockey Night Punjabi (@HkyNightPunjabi) May 23, 2016

Kucherov's second goal of the night sends Game 5 to OT. Don't Miss a Moment. #StanleyCup https://t.co/B83AnWl7g7

— NBCSN (@NBCSN) May 23, 2016

​Here's what I am not going to do. I am not going to tell you that Marc-Andre Fleury was responsible for the Penguins loss last night. Mostly because I thought he played rather well given the situation, but also because saying that Matt Murray would have done any better is strictly hypothetical. So yeah, the two goals posted above probably could have been played better, but take into account they were scored against someone that hasn't played a single meaningful hockey game in nearly two months and it's hard to look at them as egregious mistakes. 

I guess my main question is not whether or not the goalie change affected Pittsburgh's chances of winning last night, but what it does to their chances going forward. I just don't see any short term or long term benefit in starting a rusty goaltender, that already has an illustrious history as a polarizing playoff performer, in your most pressure packed postseason game to date. It's not like Matt Murray stood any chance of stopping any of the 4 goals scored against him in the Lightning's Game 4 win so a change was far from necessary. I suppose you could say that it was a motivational tool to inspire a team that nearly crawled back to tie the game upon Fleury's insertion in Game 4, but is that enough of a reason to replace the guy that got you there with someone whose always been a lightning rod ( no pun intended) for disparagement? Can a team with so many veterans be so mentally fragile that they needed a familiar face between the pipes to bounce back from a demoralizing loss?

If Matt Murray had lost a closely contested overtime game there we would just be talking about how the Penguins have to do a better job playing a full 60 minutes in Game 6. Instead you have Marc-Andre Fleury - who played better than expected - facing an undue amount of scrutiny, and you've introduced the distraction of a goaltender controversy all while your season is on the line. Fact is that Matt Murray probably would have provided at least the same level of performance in defeat and it would have come with far less questions about the stability of the Penguins lineup heading into a elimination game on the road. Long story short, I don't think Marc-Andre Fleury cost his team the game, but I think his coach's decision just made it exponentially harder for his team to win the series.