Flexibility to do what?
Throwing a good starting goalie away so you can have a worse one for a shorter time makes no sense. After Talbot's contract ends you have no starting goalie. That's not flexibility, it's a disaster. Do you remember what it was like not having a legit #1G?
This team spent years trying to plug that hole with whatever they could find. Bernier and Reimer were the closest ones in the last decade before Andersen. I don't think "flexibility" should come at the cost of starting another goalie search.
Andersen faced more shots than any other goaltender this season, was 4th in wins (behind 3 vezina candidates), and posted a very good SV% behind a poor defence.
All that while being the 16th highest paid at his position. For anyone thinking he should be paid less, tell me how many goalies as good are paid less. Care to name them? Here's the next few goalies behind him in the pay scale, in order: Bishop, Halak, Allen, Dubnyk, Anderson, Talbot, Darling, Mason, Lehner, Mrazek. There's (maybe) two guys on that list that are better bang for the buck. Where does anyone think we can get a better deal than Andersen? Aside from home-grown goalies who are in their early 20s, no one will give you better for less.
That isn't a goalie you need to get away from. He's a goalie you can win with.