Buy low, sell high. Holtby can fetch a little more than that. There's a Flames thread this morning suggesting Brodie, Rittich, 1, 2, 3 for just Cory Schneider and filler (
https://www.capfriendly.com/forums/thread/174722). The comments agree that's too much for Schneider, but I think you've overcorrected, here. Holtby is what, 2nd all time in playoff save percentage? I think he's worth a lot. Not that I wouldn't take that next summer if it's the only deal on the table and Samsonov is clearly ready to start in North America. Kylington isn't necessary for the Caps right away, but he's a decent prospect, with some trade value they can flip for a future pick, and picks are always good to have, long term.
Signing Ward who has won a Cup is good insurance.
I still think Burakovsky for Josh Anderson requires a 2nd from CJB to Was to happen today, but doesn't make sense for Washington during this season. If the Caps are completely sure they can't afford Burakovsky next year, then they should give him every chance to stick in the top six this year, get him into the power play rotation, bloat his stat line, and let teams bid for him as an RFA at the draft, like Chicago did with Brouwer.
Other possible ways to keep Burakovsky's cost from growing next season, without losing offense during the Ovechkin era:
trade him for Kovalchuck with LA retaining 50%
Trade him for Saad with Chicago retaining 50%.
Trade him for Lucic with Edmonton retaining 50%.
Trade him and Kempny for Nylander, and sign Nylander at 6Mx6y.
Sign Burakovsky to a 3.3Mx5year extension today.
That cheap extension, he'd totally sign today, given that he's a tenth of the way through the season with one point, on pace to not get a qualifying offer, and end up in the dregs of free agency like Anthony Duclair last summer (Burakovsky has 25 more career points than Duclair, so that's a pretty big fail if it happens). The big trade ideas require Burakovsky to look alive and put up some points. They require the Caps to give him extended auditions on each of the top two lines, based on his experience and skill, rather than going for the cinderella storyline of an apparent twenty goal season for Chandler Stephenson as above. In terms of value for cap hit, I think Burakovsky, if he continues developing with regular ice time in the top six, could be a better deal at 3.5M than Stephenson necessarily is at 2.5M.
Burakovsky is a year younger than Stephenson, with 44 more NHL goals, 50 to 6. Burakovsky got .5 ppg in the playoffs last Spring. Stephenson got 0.25 ppg in the playoffs, but had .50 ppg in the AHL playoffs the previous season. Promoting Stephenson over Burakovsky due to injury in the Pittsburgh series was helpful because the Penguins, who usually beat the Caps by being a bigger and stronger team, had switched to beating the Caps by being a smaller, faster team. Keeping Stephenson on the bench and developing him a bit is a fine idea. Paying him $2.5M based on lower production than Devante Smith-Pelly in easier minutes with better linemates? No.
Riley Barber and Shane Gersich each getting a raise to $1M? Generous.
Chandler Stephenson at 2.5M and Josh anderson at 1.85M instead of Burakovsky at 3.3M (q.o.) and Smith-Pelly at 1.5Mx2yrs, or so? Saves 300k, gives up a small fraction of a playoff ppg. Only about 8% of a point, in last year's numbers. Gives up 23 playoff points worth of experience (AB and DSP have 16 apiece, career. Anderson and Stephenson have 5 and 6). Gets an average of half a year younger. I'd say the 96 games of combined playoff experience you get with Burakovsky and Smith-Pelly is worth more than a half year of youth and 300k of cap savings. They have been to the dance, and they get things done there.
The apparent trend of Anderson recently scoring more goals comes from what line they're playing on, minutes, linemates. Ideally the team gets Burakovsky, like Eller, to agree to several more years at about the same cap hit, to stay in contention, and then rewards him with increased power play time, increased ice time, and can build around both. The appeal of Stephenson is that he played so well as a rookie, but he's 24. Burakovsky is 23. So who is more promising?