Ha, ha... so lets assume that I'm biased, now.
And sure, Bones is expert (but perhaps not omnipotent).
So, allow me to offer a more thorough argument. Lets think about the play. Ehlers was streaking up the middle as the Jets get set for one more rush - he was in full flight. Runs his patented half- circle wind up and then straight to north/south.
Pionk has the puck and wants to pass. The play is a set play, and its telegraphed, which shouId'nt matter at that late stage. I really like Pionk in this game, and he played a ton of minutes (27 IIRC), but as
@Jet said, he needed to take about 3 more strides to get clear of the forecheck. Likely, because he is gassed, he doesn't take those steps. Instead he gets stripped of the puck. Its a turnover.
Ehlers sees this and attempts to come back. A chaotic puck scrum in the corner, Ehlers does not get back to Matthews who interferes in the crease and pops the goal essentially in Brossoit's lap.
Is this Ehlers fault? In a stretch and technically yes, because he didn't have Matthews. Why didn't he have Matthews? Well because he was blazing down the middle at 32 kmph in the opposite direction to execute the capture of the set pass from Pionk. If one searches for first domino, its Pionk's flubbed pass and chaotic echange deep in the Jets' zone that ultimately causes this blown play.
To directly address your comments:
Yes Lowry contributed to the goal, as did Ehlers.
However,
Did Ehlers "ignore his man"? Probably not.
Did Lowry ignore his guy to stop the pass? Probably not, just, as you say, out of gas.
Did Pionk get stripped? Yes, certainly. Again, likely as he was gassed.
Are they all culpable? Sure. But here is my point: the goal wouldn't have occurred if Pionk wasn't stripped. I would suggest that Bones' comment is purposefully simplistic and probably used the opportunity as a coaching moment.
My opinion only.