In 2018 if someone had come to you and said "We'll trade you John Tavares (at a higher cap hit of course) straight up for William Nylander", everybody in the world would have done it. And that was the net effect of the Tavares deal. They could have signed him and traded Nylander for a solid D-man for the $7M salary he ended up getting that very day (equivalent of a $9M D-man today). They just didn't. There was no downside to the Tavares signing because he came for no assets. They just didn't manage the whole thing properly. I mean, imagine you could replace Nylander for no prospects or picks with John Tavares and still have the cap space for, say, Slavin or Chychrun? 'Cause that's exactly the position they were in. They just never went down that path because they could or would or something something.
There was nothing inherently wrong with the Tavares signing. Either I'm on glue or I'm the only one that gets this.