Aside from cap recapture, which would actually put the Wild in an even worse position than it would have been if either player retired before their contracts were over, you have no movement clauses. Parise would waive, but Suter would not. He only started warming up to the idea of not being on the Wild once he wasn't on the Wild. He was very clearly not going to waive.
The real alternatives:
1) The Wild keep both players and have an internal budget well below their cap space, to compensate for potential recapture, putting them in the same situation they're in now.
2) The Wild trade Parise and keep Suter, while keeping the same budget from 1) because, if either player retires. they'll need that space.
3) The Wild do either 1) or 2) and spend to the cap. If either player retired in this scenario, the Wild would be forced to sell off assets quickly (and therefore cheaply), just to get under cap. They would almost certainly have to be expensive assets, and nobody would feel inclined to do the Wild a favor by taking Zuccarello instead of Fiala, Kaprizov, JEE, etc. The Wild in this scenario can't take salary back, so if they can't find anyone willing to do that, they would then have to start buying people out... and hey we're back to buyouts! This time, they'll be added to the cap recapture, and potentially last longer.
So, if Parise and Suter don't retire in the next 4 years, then yeah, not buying them out was better from a numbers standpoint (assuming we didn't have an internal budget during that time in order to be prepared for potential retirement). If either of them does retire in the next 4 years, the buyouts were the best option.
Personally, I think the smartest way to handle it is to be certain how much money you have to work with and go from there. If you can't even plan for that, you can't plan for the future of the roster at all.
