releases Jake Odorizzi
sends Michael Stefanic to the minors

It is true that a team in 2025/26 could be able to continue to benefit from expensive players previously acquired through cash exchanges, but, if the salaries paid disappear, this same team will have to have the ability to maintain these players while remaining under the salary cap without subsidies, otherwise it will have to sell assets. And it is important to note that obtaining a salary paid has generally had a cost (in terms of players or picks) for those who have benefited from it.
Surely the effects of what has happened so far in the league will also be felt in 2025/26, but I believe that more than to the old cash exchanges going forward, this will be due to the high activity that some teams have had since the start of the league. For this reason, I believe it is key for the league to increase further the engagement and activity of the participants.

Regarding a possible cap premium, first of all, some teams with paid salaries could feel penalized since the cash exchange typically came at a cost (players, picks). Even assuming that no team disputes the cap premium, what is the fair level of the premium?
A premium of $17m is undoubtedly high, it would create an enormous amount of cap space for all teams with difficult to predict consequences and above all, by opening up new cap space, it could benefit the most active owners which are often also those with the best teams (at the moment some of the teams are constrained because they are close to the cap). On the other side, an arbitrary premium of $3-5mn for teams without paid salaries would in my opinion remain subject to criticism without helping the teams that would benefit from it much