Lightning coach Jon Cooper regretted his comments after losing a playoff series. Will he be forgiven?

Which is not to say, four years later, that Cooper should be similarly shunned and pilloried. Rather it is to underscore that Milbury, always more sharp-tongued and controversial than Cooper, was unduly booted from the booth, if not outright blackballed for saying something less egregious than Cooper.

Cooper deserves to stay behind the bench. Milbury should be allowed back on the air, sharing his informed, oft-controversial opinions, which made his intermission appearances must-watch TV and far more intriguing than the prattle we’ve been subjected too since in the United States market.

The Lightning, knocked out of the Round 1 series in five games, proved by far to be the inferior team. The Panthers were flat-out better and could be the favorite now to win the Stanley Cup, although the margins are so thin, game to game, the odds are subject to shift almost between line changes.

Cooper had abundant reason to gripe, as he did, following the 6-1 loss that put his team on vacation. Specifically, his Lightning had two goals erased following forensic video review that deemed both were the product of forwards interfering with Panthers goalie Sergei Bobrovsky.

For what it’s worth, from his comfy spot high on the turnbuckle of the family room couch, your faithful puck chronicler both times immediately hollered, “Good goal!” Wrong, and wrong again.

Now granted, I get most of these “goalie interference” calls wrong, largely because I grew up watching and then covering a 1960s, ‘70s, and ‘80s NHL that allowed attacking forwards to hack away at goalies like they were padded, oversized pinatas. Battling Billy Smith (four Cup titles, Islanders, 1980-83) battled for a reason, namely, survival. The crusty, ornery, Smith gave as good as he got, if not more, and that was fine because, to borrow from Cooper’s less-inflammatory words the other night, “prison rules” prevailed in the playoffs.

Man, did the jailhouse rock when goalies were the pylons and the plan of every team’s attack was to “send traffic to the net.” Rules? There were no rules in that knife fight.

Decades later, well, that ain’t the NHL. Two referees, rather than one, make the calls. When the guys in stripes aren’t sure, or if the NHL war room isn’t sure, the show is brought to a halt and the forensic sleuthing begins. Sometimes, as was the case in Game 5, it’s the opposing coach (Florida’s Paul Maurice) who can request a review.

Both times, the tale of the tape went upside-down for the Lightning. Anthony Duclair was deemed the guilty party on an Anthony Cirelli strike that would have provided a 1-0 lead. Then it was Cirelli whose actions at Bobrovsky’s doorstep, per review, wiped out what would have been Mikhail Sergachev’s pot for the 2-2 equalizer.

Then came the deluge. Panthers move on with a 6-1 beatdown. Lightning go home to cry in their two Cups (2020 and ‘21), each won with the brilliant Cooper as bench boss.

Even after the loss and the accompanying controversy, for the most part Cooper was his regular composed, dignified self, in the postgame presser. He noted his, shall we say, disappointment that the goals were negated in an era when, as he understands it, only a flagrant infraction should take a goal off the board.

“Maybe incidental contact, at most,” offered Cooper.

To that point, he also gave Bobrovsky a dig for exaggerating the interference around the crease. “He duped ‘em,” said Cooper, “and so be it.”

Then came the quote that Cooper later would say he wished he “could reach back and grab the words back.”

To wit: “We might as well put skirts [on the goalies] then . . . I think we are letting the goalies off the hook.”

Frankly, it’s a very old and tired line, one that dates at least to those 1960s, ‘70s, and ‘80s when everyone was saying it was OK to hammer the goalies because, well, “you know, they’re not wearing skirts.” We weren’t then what we are today. I told a female colleague the next morning that Cooper would apologize that day and do so sincerely, forthrightly, without equivocation. I came close. He did it 24 hours later, labeling it “an inappropriate analogy” during his season wrap-up session with the media.

“Quite frankly, it was wrong,” he said, “and I’ve got to explain myself to my girls. I sincerely apologize to all I offended. It’s pained me more than the actual series loss itself.”

Milbury never had the chance to explain fully, or apologize for, what he said amid the 2020 so-called “bubble” playoffs he was working in Toronto. In an on-air conversation with fellow broadcaster John Forslund, Milbury casually noted, in a tone similar to Cooper’s Monday night, that NHL players could better concentrate on the game while in the bubble.

“It’s a terrific environment,” said Forslund, noting the camaraderie the bubble fostered. “It’s a perfect place.”

“Not even any women here,” added Milbury, “to disrupt your concentration.”

Goodbye, Mike. Hello, unemployment line. With his bosses pressured by the NHL, Milbury packed up his goods within hours and headed back to the Bay State for good. NBC finalized his firing months later, in January 2021.

It was a gross overreaction by the league and NBC. Milbury, now 72, was left blacklisted by it and has worked only marginal, low-profile broadcasting gigs since. After selling their home in the Boston suburbs, Mike and wife Ginger now live year-round on Cape Cod.

It appears at the moment that Cooper will skate, his backside buffeted by the grace and intelligence of forgiveness.

“His apology was sincere,” said Milbury, reached by telephone later in the week. “Was what he said regrettable? Sure. But coach on, I say. No further action necessary. No need for an NBC-like apology — like happened to me — from the Lightning. No need for the NHL to put out a statement condemning him, as the league felt necessary in my case.”

By Milbury’s eye, the tone of Cooper’s mea culpa made clear he’s punished himself enough already.

“Still,” mused Milbury, channeling his old coach’s ethos and TV persona, “I don’t think I’d ever say an ill-advised comment was worse than being eliminated from the playoffs!”

As Game 7 against the Maple Leafs approached Saturday night, win or lose, the Bruins looked primed for a significant roster rework this summer, one possibly with general manager Don Sweeney positioned with the most spending cash ($25 million?) he’s had since taking over in the spring of 2015.

If we’re to assume Jake DeBrusk, Matt Grzelcyk, and Linus Ullmark won’t be asked back, that’s upward of $13 million shaken out of the 2023-24 payroll. Of the returnees, only Jeremy Swayman is in line for a whopping bump in pay, one that could see his dough jump to around $7 million a year. His increase should be equal to the $3.7 million cap hit that Grzelcyk carried the last four years.

With next season’s cap projected to be roughly $88 million, and factoring Swayman retained at around $7.5 million, Sweeney will have roughly that $25 million free to cover some low-budget re-signings such as forwards Danton Heinen and Jesper Boqvist, leaving ample cash to take a couple of big swings in free agency.

The most attractive name out there is Steven Stamkos, the 34-year-old Lightning captain and Tampa icon. Word down there in the wake of the Bolts’ Round 1 exit was that both sides are committed to him staying in place and extending a run that has reached 16 seasons. He has been their Bergeron-plus in terms of impact, production, class, and overall je ne sais quoi.

If Stammer’s time is up in Tampa, then look for Red Wings GM Steve Yzerman, his old boss with the Lightning, to make a huge push to bring him to Detroit. The Wings need him as much as the Bruins. Like here, he’d plug in as the franchise center and lift the profile and order of the entire top six. Albeit with the standard caveats: age and mileage (a combined 1,210 games, playoffs and two Cup wins included).

There’s a drop in production coming for Stamkos, which is part of the factoring why an extension already hasn’t been negotiated. His pay would have to be somewhere around the $7 million per that the Kings’ Anze Kopitar has waiting for the next two seasons.

The heat of these playoffs has underscored, not surprisingly, the Bruins’ need for an elite, bona fide difference-maker at the No. 1 pivot. Charlie Coyle and Pavel Zacha have their gifts, but they are not those gifts.

It’s almost impossible to acquire a No. 1 as a plug-and-play. The last one in Boston was Marc Savard, who arrived with Zdeno Chara in July 2006. The soft-handed Savard, about to turn 29 upon his arrival, averaged just shy of 90 points for his first three seasons, only to have his career short-circuited by a head-hunting Matt Cooke in March 2010.

The other big need here, yet again, is a master hand to be added to the top four on defense. Something has gone way out of whack back there.

Charlie McAvoy is not the force everyone expected he would be after seven full NHL seasons. He is still young (26), so there’s time, but now is when the Bruins desperately need him to be the franchise defenseman. The future has arrived for him. It should be his team to lead. We’ve yet to be convinced he can do it.

Hampus Lindholm, who looked like a brilliant get when Sweeney acquired him at the 2022 trade deadline, this season played levels below his billing. His work on D was often spotty, sometimes barely that of a No. 3 pairing blue liner. His offensive production was cut in half from last season. Prior to Game 7, his playoff experience with the Bruins was 17 games, 0-2–2. Not what we were looking for, right?

The fix back there has to be aimed at finding the guy who helps McAvoy and Lindholm be the better/best versions of themselves. In-house, that might be Mason Lohrei, who has shown some brilliant flashes. A best case would be Lohrei helps those two settle into their job definitions and thrive. But that could be 2-3 years down the road for Lohrei to become that impactful.

For those with long memories, the Bruins need a Brad McCrimmon type, someone with top-four stabilizing skill and heft who would eat up big minutes and buy room for McAvoy and Lindholm to focus and flourish at the things they do best.

A name to consider: Carolina’s Brady Skjei, the onetime Rangers first-rounder (No. 28, 2012). Now 30, he is on target for the UFA market and this season was Carolina’s top-producing defenseman (13-34–47). Current cap hit: $5.25 million. It probably would take Lindholm-like money ($6.5 million) or more to get the deal done.

All in all, a busy and critical summer for Sweeney. He has positioned himself to take one or two big swings, and he needs to connect. He can ill afford a replay of, say, the five-year, $30 million cut he took on David Backes in July 2016.

Dave Hakstol, a curious hire when he was named the first coach in Kraken history, is out in Seattle. Meanwhile, Rod Brind’Amour still is without a new deal with the Hurricanes.

Make of that what you will, but Kraken GM Ron Francis had a long tenure calling the shots in Raleigh, N.C., and the 53-year-old Brind’Amour would seem the perfect law-and-order candidate to unlock the sea monstahs.

Deep-pocketed Kraken ownership will pay, no problem, while Hurricanes owner Tom Dundon has a history of saying he doesn’t believe top dollar guarantees anything but paying top dollar.

Brind’Amour’s Hurricanes have not missed the playoffs since he took over following the 2017-18 season. He has a big fight in Round 2 against the Rangers, but it’s possible he’ll get the Hurricanes into the Cup semis for a third time during his tenure. This is his 13th postseason round in his time as bench boss, as impressive as his legendary work ethic.

One way or another, Brind’Amour is sitting on a potential record-setting payday. There are jobs open in San Jose, New Jersey, Ottawa, and potentially a handful of others (including, as of Saturday morning, Boston and Toronto).

When the summer is over, Brind’Amour’s payday could rank in the top five of all free agent signings, players included.

Kevin Paul Dupont can be reached at kevin.dupont@globe.com.