If you were a young kid like this who still believed in fairness and consistency from your coach, who would you expect to see eating Ho-Hos in the press box the next game?
Just as a thought problem--entirely hypothetical--imagine you were a young hockey player. Now suppose--again, nothing to do with reality here--that on your very first shift as a young rookie that you made a bone-headed mistake and cost your team a goal. Coach thought you were a promising guy who just needed a kick in the ass, so he benched you. Now just suppose that the very next game your team played a first period that just sucked all over place, kind of like the Avs tonight (though, of course, this obviously has nothing to do with the Avs).
Honestly, after that first period who _wouldn't_ you expect to see? Andy played well. I thought Winnik looked good all game except that he was part of the 3-on-1 that didn't even get a shot off. Foote looked about the same as always. I actually thought Hannan had a good game. Um ... Stastny? So, is that who you suit against Detroit tomorrow? Two defensemen and two forwards? I take it back: Radar also looked fine. Maybe Budaj can suit up as a forward. Actually, Dupuis didn't look horrible. He didn't look great either.
In the meantime, when you obviously can't be consistent with our hypothetical rookie, what the heck do you say to him? How do you keep your credibility as a coach in this no-win situation (since you obviously need to field a team tomorrow night)?