The problem is... NHL vs NBA vs NFL vs MLB leagues all have different circumstances to deal with.
- NBA has a $#!T ton of money, and only 12 man rosters. NBA players get guaranteed contracts and their careers have good longevity as long as the put in the effort. League luxury tax discourages teams from limitless salaries, but there seems to be plenty of money to go around.
- MLB has lots of rich owners and REALLY rich owners who want to win at all costs. There is no salary cap and players get guaranteed contracts. Baring injury, players can have long careers. Long seasons put lots of money in the owners pockets, but the REALLY rich owners get more money from local TV deals.
- NFL has huge national TV deals, but only 8 home games per season. They have a strict salary cap and players - on average - have much shorter careers. It is the exception that players get fully guaranteed contracts. Further, contracts are usually structured such that after a couple of years, players can get cut without dramatically hurting the team's salary cap position, i.e. the guaranteed money is front loaded.
- NHL has lots of home games, a strict salary cap, lowest of the big-four sports in TV revenue, and that money has to be spread across a 32 man roster (not 12, like NBA).
Plus the strength of the players union and their collective bargaining agreements vary from sport to sport.
To answer the question...
- In the NFL, if they player was really good, they'd find a way to try to rehabilitate him or trade him - think Warren Sapp or Ndamukong Suh. Otherwise, if he ain't good, he gets cut.
- In the NBA or MLB, where contracts are guaranteed, you can't cut him, so you have to try to rehabilitate him and/or trade him.
- The problem with the NHL is... a lot of times, you can't trade him. I think I heard around 60% of the players in the league have a "No Trade" clause. NFL players don't like to move around. So their stuck with him. The Wild is still paying of the Parise/Suter deal, the league-wide NHL salary cap hasn't gone up the past several years*, and so the Wild are hamstrung at the top of the salary cap to retail their current players and attract free agents. Cutting Ryan Hartman makes that scenario even worse.
I heard a reporter speculate that GM Bill Guerin might have tried to get Ryan to waive his no trade clause and move him before the trading deadline, but the suspension pretty much destroys any plans Bill might have had now or in the future to move him. It ain't a good situation.
*The Wild knew they were mortgaging their future when they signed Parise and Suter to 13 year contracts, but they hoped the financial damage would be mitigated by the league salary cap going up every year - so they could pay to retain their up-and-coming talent and keep their core together for years to come (even if it wasn't for the full duration of the 13 year Parise/Suter contract). Problem is, the salary cap stayed level for most of those years and the Wild's financial plan fell apart.
With the Parise/Suter buyout in effect, after this season, the team will only carry about $1.67 million each year on the books for the next 4 years (a number which is manageable with sports franchise Monopoly money) and the NHL salary cap has finally started to go up again. But still, the Wild won't have any additional wiggle room after they sign Kaprizov - if they can sign Kaprizov. So unless Guerin can pull a rabbit out of his hat, the Wild might be stuck with Hartman.