Stanley Cup Final predictions, NHL playoff format, officiating, 2026 Olympics and more

New York Times

2 days ago

By Sean Gentille, Shayna Goldman, Jesse Granger, James Mirtle, Mark Lazerus and The Athletic NHL Staff
No, it's not 2024.
It might feel that way, however, as the Florida Panthers continue their quest to win a second straight championship on Wednesday night when they open a rematch of the Stanley Cup Final against the Edmonton Oilers.
Advertisement
A familiar matchup calls for something different, which is why we knew we had to go deeper, make this more interesting, more fun than just picking the winner and who will get the Conn Smythe Trophy — don't worry, we do that, too.
Beyond that, we had The Athletic's NHL staff give their opinions on playoff officiating, the idea of changing the postseason format, the 2026 Milano Cortina Olympics and next year's Stanley Cup champion.
Here are the results of the survey, with analysis and critique from senior writers Sean Gentille, James Mirtle and Mark Lazerus, analytics know-it-all Shayna Goldman and goaltending expert Jesse Granger.
Let's get into it.
Figures are rounded and some staff comments have been edited for length and clarity.
Lazerus: A coin flip sounds just about right, though I still lean Florida based on the Sergei Bobrovsky vs. Stuart 'Box of Chocolates' Skinner. Also, if Darnell Nurse or Evan Bouchard try to break anyone's foot in the final, something tells me Florida will actually respond. This will be a very different series for Edmonton than the Western Conference final. Florida is mean, nasty, physical, tested and remarkably rested for a team entering its third straight Stanley Cup Final — everything Dallas wasn't.
Gentille: I told myself at the start of all this that whichever team won the first-round matchup between Florida and Tampa Bay would make the final, and that I couldn't trust Skinner to hold up over the course of a full postseason. That all still checks out — but most of all, I'm done picking against the Panthers until they lose another series. They have to show that they can't do it.
Granger: Tampa Bay looked like perhaps the most complete team in the league entering the playoffs, and the Panthers steamrolled them. Carolina was playing so well, I believed in the Hurricanes more than ever before heading into the Eastern Conference final, and Florida demolished them. Edmonton is a great team, but this Florida squad has made a habit of making great teams look bad.
Advertisement
Mirtle: All right, I'll admit it, I'm going Oilers in seven. Something about the way Edmonton has decimated three good teams in a row just says team of destiny to me this year. Or more like a player of destiny, given how focused and determined Connor McDavid looks.
Goldman: I have picked against the Oilers every round and have been wrong, but … I still am picking against them here. I think the series goes seven again, and maybe in less dramatic fashion than last year. The Zach Hyman injury is what holds me back, despite McDavid hitting that next level in Round 3 that I think we were all waiting to see.
Lazerus: Sam Bennett leads the postseason with 10 goals and influences the game as much as any player on the Panthers. Perhaps no individual player is a better fit for his team than Bennett and the Panthers. If he pops a game-winning goal or two in this series, we're all going to look pretty silly when he wins the Conn Smythe. (And some GM is going to look even sillier when he gives him a seven-year, $77 million contract.)
Gentille: I went with Aleksander Barkov. That took some degree of projection, but he's the leading scorer on the team I think is going to win the series, and he's a name-brand guy who's already had a couple of major moments in the playoffs thus far, most recently in the third period of Florida's clincher against the Hurricanes.
Granger: Bobrovsky leads all goalies with 40 playoff wins over the last three seasons. The next-closest is Jake Oettinger with 29. He also leads all goalies with 36.71 goals saved above expected over that span, more than 10 clear of the next goalie. If Florida wins, he should get his Conn Smythe to sit next to his two Vezina trophies.
Mirtle: Leon Draisaitl feels low to me, given how close he's been to McDavid for a lot of this run. And McDavid won last year, so maybe that sways a few voters to change it up a little if they're close.
Goldman: Echoing Sean on this one with Barkov, but for a slightly different reason: if Florida wins again, it's likely because Barkov's line has slowed down McDavid or Draisaitl. That's what could separate him from someone like Bennett in voting.
A bad call in the playoffs always gets big attention, and this year, the hockey world is buzzing every time the rule book seems to be ignored in a game. Our panel did not go easy on their grading.
'As bad as usual. Inconsistent rule book with the added bonus of prison rules in high-leverage games. By 'letting them play,' the officials create an advantage to the team that breaks the most rules when the games matter most. No other sport treats the rule book as optional.'
'They're officiating the score and situation, not the rules. A penalty is a penalty; it doesn't matter when it happened in a game or if a team is ahead or behind. This isn't new. It's always this way. And it's no secret the whistles will be in Saskatchewan and Cuba instead of Edmonton and Sunrise for the Cup Final. The 'let them play' motto is nonsense. Let them play under the rules.'
'The lack of consistency from game to game and series to series makes it very difficult for players to understand where the line is.'
'I don't know if following the rule book to the letter would actually create a game most people want to watch. Players do take advantage of that wiggle room in the playoffs, and when 'letting them play' goes against a team you're invested in, there are understandably intense emotions and reactions in such high-stakes games. But I think consistency is more the key measure to grading officials, and I haven't had major issues with the refs in these playoffs by that standard. It has been interesting to see some embellishment calls — that was not something I would have anticipated, and it feels like a particularly difficult call to be consistent on. The officials will never be perfect, of course, and there is usually a call or two in each game worthy of scrutiny. But that's part of the game and the fine margins of playoff hockey.'
'Don't we complain about officiating every year? And it's still bad? At this point, apathy has long set in over officiating.'
'It's far from perfect, but the officials have also become the whipping boys for every fan base that's sour about how the postseason went. 'We want consistency!' No, you want the calls to go your way, just like everyone else. At least own it.'
Advertisement
Lazerus: Hey! I wrote about this!
Gentille: It's been worse. Also, after decades as a fan and then someone who covers the league, I've lost the capacity to get all that mad over officiating, barring something egregiously awful at a terrible time. Which means we're about to get something egregiously awful at a terrible time.
Goldman: The problem is that the bar is so low with NHL officiating — we all expect a lot of mistakes, and this year is no different. There's been controversy in pretty much every series Florida has been a part of because of how they walk the line, and that conversation is bound to continue in the final. I think the big difference from years past is that there haven't been as many controversies surrounding things such as goalie interference because most of the challenges have been questionable in the first place.
A first-round matchup of two heavyweights in this year's playoffs, the Avalanche and Stars, reignited the debate on whether the NHL should change its playoff format. So we polled our writers.
Eight staff members simply wrote '1 vs. 8.'
'Bring back the 1 vs. 8 format. Never found an issue with it when it was changed to division-based to supposedly inject existing rivalries with rocket fuel. I like the occasional variance that playoff matchups brought with 1 vs. 8.'
'They should seed each side 1-8, and they never should have stopped doing that.'
'Everyone in the league and 95 percent of fans — I know this because I asked on social media — want the 1 vs. 8 format. It shouldn't be this hard.'
'I've been in favor of the divisional rivalries. But this format has led to too much repetition among conference finalists. NHL should adopt the NBA format, including the play-in for seeds 7-10. There's nothing wrong with stealing a good idea. It won't dilute the playoffs. And it rewards the top six teams with time off at the start of the playoffs.'
'I don't need a play-in or anything like that — there aren't enough good teams to justify that — but it should be seeded 1-8.'
'I never minded 1 vs. 8 when that was the format and don't have a huge opposition to it, but I think there's a little too much blame being placed on the format/seeding for certain teams' outcomes. Sure, Tampa and Toronto would have been better off not drawing the Panthers in the first or second round, but they were going to have to play them eventually to make a serious run. Going 1 vs. 8 in the West would have kept us from matching up two favorites in Dallas and Colorado in Round 1, but two of the Western Conference series would have remained the same, and a 1 vs. 8 format would have still pitted the Stars against the Oilers (the eventual conference final) in that first round as a 3 vs. 6 matchup. The eventual East final (Carolina vs. Florida) would have also been a first-round 4 vs. 5 matchup. In hindsight, the short series would indicate maybe that would have been better in this case. But with enough good teams, someone is always in what feels like 'too hard' of a first-round draw. Getting tough, dramatic series in the first round is a good thing, not something to be wished away, even though the short conference finals were disappointing. And while certain teams surely can get tougher early matchups than seems 'fair' based on the regular-season standings, the bottom line is if you can't win that matchup, you can't win the Stanley Cup.'
'The 82-game regular season should matter and the fans want a return to 1 vs. 8. The current playoff format has not worked. It's time to reward the work that players put into the regular season and to respond to the fans for a change.'
'The divisional alignment is pitched as rivalry-forming, but I don't think NHL players need an extra pretense to compete with each other over the course of a seven-game playoff series. In practice, it creates high-quality matchups earlier in the playoffs instead of saving them for the conference finals. Is this better for TV revenue? Is this better for selling outsiders on the wonder of playoff hockey? Or just a meaningless way of devaluing regular season performance in the name of a divisional rival storyline that few people seem to care about?'
Advertisement
Lazerus: Conferences mean so little these days. Let's just go 1-16 already.
Gentille: I also want to see a test drive of a seeds 7-10, NBA-style play-in tournament. It rewards better teams, creates stakes down the stretch, adds revenue and works well as a TV event.
Granger: I disagree with you both and want my old 1 vs. 8 back in both conferences. And while we're at it, move Detroit back to the West.
Mirtle: Add the play-in, go 1 vs. 8, and suddenly there's a nice advantage to having a good regular season again.
Goldman: Mostly on the same page as Mirtle; 1-8 is absolutely the way to go, but the play-in, I think, needs to be very limited: seeds eight and nine have a three-game wild card series. Any other playoff expansion waters it down way too much.
Looking ahead, the 2026 Milano Cortina Olympics are scheduled for next year and after this year's 4 Nations Face-Off tournament, there is a lot of intrigue. Rosters will begin to roll out on June 15, with each country expected to name its initial six players, and the rest of the roster expected in December.
Lazerus: I still don't trust Canada's goaltending, but Connor Hellebuyck in the second round and Jake Oettinger in the third round didn't exactly fill Americans with confidence, either.
Gentille: Hellebuyck and Oettinger could've gotten their teams swept and I still wouldn't have picked against the U.S. here.
Granger: After that 4 Nations Face-Off, I'm just pumped to watch the Tkachuk brothers as teammates again, and hope the Olympic-style rules don't dampen the fun.
Mirtle: I'm outnumbered here! Until Canada loses a best-on-best, they're winning them all on paper. Especially while Sidney Crosby is around.
Goldman: Maybe losing 4 Nations will light a fire under Team USA … but I can't see Crosby losing in what is likely his last Olympics.
To close things out, we went back to where we started — Lord Stanley — and asked who will win the Stanley Cup next season?
Lazerus: This was harder than I expected. While I'm sure Florida and Edmonton will be in the mix again, it's tough to pick yet another deep run for each of them. Picking Dallas or Carolina, as usual, feels like Charlie Brown trying to kick a football. And after that, every team has a lot of question marks. It could be a wide-open field next year. Or it could be between the same few teams again.
Advertisement
Gentille: Someday, we'll all be right about the Stars.
Granger: The Panthers have some major pending UFAs this summer. Sam Bennett, Aaron Ekblad, Nate Schmidt and deadline rental Brad Marchand are all on expiring deals. Plus, Bobrovsky will be 37 before the season begins. Having said all of that, my money is still on Florida.
Mirtle: Let us at least see free agency first … feels like mass upheaval is coming this offseason with so many teams with tons of cap room. Points to whoever was picking the Wild, as they're finally out of buyout jail.
Goldman: I'll buy the Stars if someone else is behind the bench … until then, I'm super curious to see what a team like Tampa Bay does to keep its window open for another year.
Here's how our first-, second- and third-round predictions held up, with the actual result of the series, the percent of voters who picked the right team and the percent who picked the right team and number of games:
(Illustration: Dan Goldfarb / The Athletic; Patrick Smith, Harry How / Getty Images)