I do think Malkin will be underrated historically when it's all said and done. But I think suggesting that he was on the a similar level to Joe Sakic is very fair for him.
The Pens intermission gang talked about something that I think is valid here - while they didn't name Jarry specifically, they talked about how deflating a soft goal can be for the bench. You battle, you make the saves, the team is doing well...and then a soft one is let in and the team deflates. They were indicating that Blomqvist was NOT doing that which I think is very fair. I don't remember Neds letting too many soft goals that just deflated the team.
Unfortunately, Jarry has played himself into an area that will be VERY difficult to get out of. I posted about this a couple days ago. It doesn't matter if the game is 1-1 and you're posting a .975 sv%, if you let in the soft goal late in the third and the team losing 2-1, no one gives a shit about the awesome stats. If you're battling in a 6-6 game and running a 0.825 sv% but you make the key save late in the third and the team wins 7-6, no one gives a shit about the crappy stats. We are sooooooooooooooooo f***ing far past stat watching with Jarry that it's near meaningless. Jarry needs to give this team the opportunity to win EVERY SINGLE NIGHT. And going back well into last year, I would say he has NOT done that with any level of consistency that should be expected out of a "starting goalie" making $5.25mil. Neds, however, did, which is why he was the starter down the stretch. Blomqvist did last night.
In every game, we know the goals that are the goalie's fault and which are not. I didn't blame Blomqvist for the rocket Tarasanko sent over his shoulder, and I wouldn't have blamed Jarry either. Sometimes, high-quality forwards just fire lasers into the net. It's part of the game. On the 5 on 3, Blomqvist battled HARD and made several saves before succumbing. It's not his fault, and I wouldn't have faulted Jarry either; however, I have SEVERE doubts as to whether or not Jarry would have survived the same amount of time Blomqvist just did.
The fact of the matter is, every game, any given team will put 30+ shots on our goalie. When it comes down to it, that means 30+ different times where the forwards and defense failed to control the puck and defend. But that's part of the game. That is going to happen. The argument of "well, it's not Jarry's fault because the team in front of him allowed the other team to shoot the puck" is absolute hogwash. The goalie's job is to stop the puck. Period. Shots from the other team will happen 30+ times a game. They need to stop them in order for the team to win. Nickel and diming the defense is a weak argument to cover for poor goalie performance.