What I was getting at was the way the money is utilized where you only address the acquisition potential.
Hypothetically say the Leafs take on a $6 mil player as a amnesty buyout and get a younger player in addition that can play say making $1.5 mil.
The buyout is 2/3rds of $6 mil, so that is $4 mil actual payout to get rid of him.. Essentially that makes the young player making $5.5 mil in actuality when you add his contract + the buyout amount. While an amnesty would avoid the cap consequences, but not the wasted money aspect.
So couldn't a team like the Leafs rather spend that actual $5.5 mil (opportunity cost and actual MLSE $$) proactively on a much better player, like say offering it to David Clarkson as a UFA this summer?
If I was an owner and my GM was picking between picking up other teams mistakes to spend my money getting rid of them, or actively pursuing top end talent and investing my money on that player I know which option I would chose.