Okay, it looks like we're back to square one, since it's pretty obvious that cutting Arrington would put us in the red for 2014, which is what I was trying to ask in the post that you didn't understand (likely to no fault of yours).
Since your scenario includes the post-June 1st designation, your "cap savings" could be said about any number of players. Of course the kicker is that we also have to deal with it next year as well. I still think the bottom line is that it'd cost more to cut him than to keep him, which was my point all along, and the question that I was trying to propose to you.
http://overthecap.com/teamcap.php?Team=Patriots&Year=2014
I'm not sure why you aren't getting this.
Arrington's cap hit is 3.625 mill if we keep him and 2.625 if we cut him.
Arrington has 5.875 mill guaranteed money left in his contract.
Whether we keep him or cut him, we will be charged that. He has already received it.
If we keep Arrington this year we pay him another 2 mill on top of that 5.875, so total cap cost from 2014 forward is at least 7.875 mill.
If we cut Arrington this year, total cap cost from 2014 forward will be 5.875.
I'm not sure why 'it can be said of many players' has anything to do with whether we save money by cutting him, or the premise that he has to make the team because he costs too much to cut could be true.
As far as 'dealing with that next year' I don't understand, because we have to deal with that next year any way.
We actually accelerate 1 mill of the future cap hits into this year while saving 1 mill in 2014.
That is why the savings a 1 mill and not 2mill by cutting a player with a 2 mill salary.
So, if kept in 2014, the sunk money remaining is 4.125 mill.
If cut in 2014 the sunk money remaining is 3.125 mill.
Whether you are talking about today, tomorrow, or forever, the Patriots save money on the cap by cutting Kyle Arrington.
The question is having him at 3.625 better than not having him and paying 2.625.
Clearly if a player at the minimum beats him out, then yes cutting him is wise.