I get that you don’t want to trade a first to get rid of Eriksson, but that’s actually the going price for a one year cap dump BEFORE the flat cap as seen in the Carolina/Toronto trade. So you probably need to add to the Chicago trade. I would start with your second this year, and work from there.

I don't see VAN buying out Virtanen and Holtby, Aquilini would not allow it.

"as seen in the Carolina/Toronto trade"
That was 6 million cap hit, 6 million real salary. Eriksson will have 3 million real salary after signing bonuses are paid. Presumably 2021 pick is not included so that the signing bonuses have been paid (i.e. after the draft this year)

if virtanen truly has negative value (which IMO is not the case but people are all over on this one) then it would save aqualini 2/3rds of the remaining cash to buy out this deal, which I imagine he would not have a problem with. similar in a sense for holtby: if a replacement can be had for less than the difference between his 2021-2022 salary (5.7 million) and the buyout cost (3.8 million) I don't think there would be a problem.

I think the 6 million cap hit was the deciding factor in that trade, so my point still stands. Saving real money should be considered, but I think in this cap environment the AAV is the number GM’s are most concerned about. If you guys did this on the draft day then I think a 2021 pick would be in play, but in any case you should add more to the trade.

"I think the 6 million cap hit was the deciding factor in that trade"
this is fair - especially when trading to CHI which could in principle come close to the cap. non-cap teams, maybe not

I’m not sure exactly what you mean, but I do think Chicago is a good destination for Eriksson... we have made it known we are taking on bad contracts for sweeteners. In this case, I think the return coming to Chicago should be more than just a 2nd round pick.

it cost a first because the 'handshake' agreement to buy out marleau.

cost is a 2nd 'a la' marc staal