Regarding the goaltender debate, Dan says that Matt Murray was not the reason the Penguins lost on Saturday, and that he gave the team an opportunity to win.
"Was he really that big of an issue in Game 1," Dan asked. "I thought he was fine. I think that they should have won the game. They had multiple chances to win the game. I'd go back to him. I think Matt Murray played the way he's supposed to play, if he plays like that, like he did, then the Penguins should have a chance to win Game 2. There's no question about it, because he gave them a chance to win."
Still, Dan noted that he understands a scenario where Tristan Jarry could have started the series in net, and believes it would have made perfect sense based on Murray's recent playoff history. The two-time Stanley Cup winning goaltender has lost seven-straight playoff games.
"I think you could have gone that direction," he said. "Yes, I don't want to think it's a mistake that they started Murray based on his performance in Game 1. I think he answered the bell just fine. See here's the thing, I don't know that I would change it now. But if you were to go into this series with Jarry as the starting goaltender and you gave me those numbers and you made that argument to me, I'd be like 'yeah, that makes a lot of sense.'"
Dan also praised Pittsburgh's rookie defenseman John Marino for his stellar play in the series opener, one of the lone bright spots in the 3-2 OT loss.
"He was great. He was fantastic in that game," he said. "Always in position, snuffing out plays in the defensive end, jumping in. He was very noticeable for me. I thought he was the Penguin's best defenseman of the game."