In response to ThatHockeyGuy's comment:
In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
Okay, so I have five examples of them keeping the lead, you have two examples of them losing it.
If they can go 5 for 7 every month, I don't think many would complain...except those who think perfection is possible every year.
If they go 5 for 7 every month, that is still not good enough. That would place them in the bottom 5 of the league. They should not be with the likes of Edmonton, Dallas, Colorado, and Buffalo in regards to any statistic.
I am not demanding perfection, but I do expect them to play up to their capabilities.
If they go 5 of 7 for the next two months, they win the Cup. I think that's the point here. Comparing winning % when leading in the third doesn't consider that the Bruins have the lead going into the third more than almost any other team. Only Pitt led going into the third more often. And there are a lot of near-perfect teams at the top who really enjoyed the draft lottery. Columbus was perfect. Phoenix and Carolina were over 93%.
Do they need to be better at holding leads? Yes, they do. Is it such a huge deal that you should ignore the role of luck, in this case, bad luck? Well, you can, but you're going to find watching hockey very frustrating.
The one thing I will say to nite's original point is that there is someimes some correlation between skill and lucky bounces. You just have to look farther back in the play. On the Senators' winner, that pass from Karlsson to Methot was 83' hard, flat, and right on the tape. Methot then made the right play, and made the decision quickly, to put the puck on net. Shot was low, and hard enough to pinball through. So that's a superb play by Karlsson, the right follow-up by Methot, and then a luck bounce to Pageau.