Not a surprise in context of the scoreboard, but way too much is being put on Andersen in here.
The first goal, you want that back because it’s entirely on the goalie to have a line on the puck when it’s moving freely around the zone like that. His vision was off and his positioning was also off if he couldn’t see it. So yes, soft goal.
Second goal wasn’t as clear-cut his fault as is being portrayed. You want him holding his post there. If the puck is thrown at his feet, it shouldn’t be a matter of the next forward having a clear uncontested lane to jam at it. This is the one that people are putting entirely on Andersen while looking the other way at what transpired defensively.
3 and 4 were not stoppable shots with anything less than pure luck.
It wasn’t a banner game for him, but people are completely overlooking the score effects of this game. The Canes got that 3-1 lead and their possession game disappeared. Even at that, they had a couple of glorious chances to put it away for good. Those went by the wayside. The defensive shell cracked under constant pressure, and we ended up with Staal of all people in the penalty box. Even at that, they still had a shot to tie and couldn’t bury the shot they needed to save the season. These are the things a team does to blow a playoff game, and they were far more influential on the outcome than goaltending on either side.