It's of more than passing lexicographical interest that the Minnesota Wild who potted the gamewinner last night is named Cal Clutterbuck, and that his name rhymes fairly convincingly with an unbloggable description for how the Bruins as a whole managed to give one up at home to the 10th-best team in the Western Conference -- albeit a team that is also only three points worse than the Bruins are this season.Claude Julien is peeved (again) at Marc Savard for an incomprehensible giveaway that led to the aforementioned Clutterbuck clusterpuck. Again, there is talk about "responsibility" and "accountability" and all those things that always get mentioned when the Bruins lose a game they should have won. It is a curious thing. When the Bruins lose, it is almost always explained as a lack of effort, a lack of will, or a lack of something you can't measure or, in many case, really identify. (Pro Tip: Beware most arguments based on what the person making the argument refers to as "the intangibles" because, in that context, "the intangibles" is roughly translated as "stuff I pulled out of my ear 10 minutes ago.") This Blog doesn't believe that this is the case with many of the other teams alleged, as are the Bruins, to be competing for a championship. Isn't part of being a championship team over a long season the ability to win games at half-speed when you have to do so? Or to win games when, frankly, you don't play very well? Anyone who believes that the only way the Bruins can win a Stanley Cup is with 100 percent effort every night is either overrating them as a contender in the first place, or that person is dreaming. If in fact it's true that the Bruins can't win without that level of effort, well, then, it falls to This Blog to point out that it has now been 10 years longer between cups here than it was between the 1970 Stanley Cup and the one before that.(And, as an NHL not-for-nothing, but was This Blog the only one to get nasty Eric Lindros flashbacks when it heard this news?)