He and others will have the answers, or at least try to, in time. No doubt there will be a lot of reflection.
For now, though, it's about trying to digest what happened in a first-round series that for the first 20 minutes looked like it was going to be a breeze for the Lightning.
They led 3-0 in the first period of Game 1. They were outscored 19-5 over the next 11 periods.
What went wrong?
"Everything," Stamkos said.
The Lightning struggled to possess the puck, to skate with it, to make plays. Those were three of their biggest strengths all season, and the Blue Jackets turned them into their weaknesses with relentless pressure, great sticks, smart reads, sturdy structure and discipline.
"We obviously didn't have the answers," Stamkos said. "They executed obviously a pretty detailed game plan to slow us down, and we didn't really have a response to it."
Special teams were a huge part of the Lightning's success this season. They led the NHL on the power play (28.2 percent) and penalty kill (85.0 percent).
"Let us down in playoffs," Stamkos said.
The Lightning were 1-for-6 with a shorthanded goal-against on the power play, including 0-for-5 in Games 1 and 2. They did not have a power play in Game 3 and scored on their one chance in Game 4.
Tampa Bay was 5-for-10 and scored a shorthanded goal on the penalty kill.
The Blue Jackets scored their game-winning goals in Games 1, 2 and 3 on the power play. In Game 4, it came on a delayed penalty at 6-on-5, with Oliver Bjorkstrand scoring with 1:14 left in the second period.
"It's not the lack of power plays or anything like that, it was just [we] couldn't kill them off," Cooper said. "We give up a power-play goal and give up a 6-on-5 goal, and that's it. You look at the series and how close it was. The scores might not show it, but it's a one-goal game and ultimately special teams were the difference in all of them."