I am pretty sure the NHLPA would be more than willing to fight you on this as this was a negotiated contract not an arbitration awarded settlement. The key here will be the cases of past buy outs and if any were done in the second window when a player has negotiated a contract before arbitration. I honestly cannot think of one case where a team has used the second buy out in the case. They have with Arbitration awarded contracts after it has gone to the arbitrator or traded a player who was going to arb.
Then why make the listing of the two different options?
Nope, I'm fairly certain negotiating a new contract with a player headed to arbitration is considered a settlement. Makes sense to me when I think about it ~ when the two sides of legal proceedings make a deal before trial, it's considered a settlement as well
And the outcome if it did go to arbitration is considered an award.
Put far more simply, a second buyout window opens no matter what after a player elects arbitration. It's unclear whether the Canucks will use that option, and there are restrictions on *who* they can buy out, but yeah
Another point is very few cases actually go to arbitration