Some notes (optional reading if you like to read):

Protections:
O'Reilly, Tarasenko, Schenn, Perron, Thomas, Kyrou, Schwartz
Parayko Faulk Dunn
Binnington

Seattle takes: Barbashev or Walman probably. I'm exposing Krug, I would expose Faulk if pushed hard enough, but either is far too expensive for what they are versus the other options Seattle will have to work with this year so why even bother protecting them? We have a ton of solid options in house (Mikkola, Perunovich, Walman) and on the open market (Mike Rielly, Larsson, Murray, maybe Hamilton even) if Seattle goes off the board, but the chances they will are so small, and honestly? Having a Krug or Faulk contract off the books opens up a lot of interesting possibilities to me.

Scandella trade: He doesn't have to go to Vegas but they'll need an extra lefty if they intend to let Martinez walk (and Martinez is due for a hefty raise per Evolving Hockey, which is weird since he's ancient). Anyway, Scandella could also go to Winnipeg, Montreal if they move on from Kulak, Arizona, Dallas if they move on from Oleksiak, LA, or Vancouver or maybe somewhere else idk he's perfectly fine. Obviously if we lose a Krug or Faulk you don't need to trade him, it's more about opening up a roster spot than anything else.

Contract extensions (mostly) done through Evolving-Hockey:
I'm probably underselling what Ryan and maybe Tatar will command on the open market but like they're both really good and I feel like I never hear about either one? I'm clipping a bit on their Evolving-Hockey contract projections but Craig Smith is my Tatar comp and Nate Thompson is my Ryan comp, and they both came in less than expected. If Tatar is too expensive, Coleman/Hyman are other options to fill that role, and we have picks in play to make a trade. All other contracts done using Evolving-Hockey's model. Sign Bozak as he's been really good and give Kostin a shot with Thomas and Kyrou. I didn't qualify Sanford.

Halak had a down year, the Bruins aren't keeping him, and he is 36 so he should come pretty cheap. I'm not too worried. Husso is still in the system and unlikely to be claimed off waivers due to, you know, being bad most of the year. I'm not opposed to giving him a second chance at the backup crease but we're in the throes of our window and our goaltending was baaad this year, so why take the chance? Best case scenario, Husso has a Nedelijkovic like resurgence, Halak and Binnington are solid, and we can run three or trade one of Husso or Halak at the deadline. Worst case, you've got depth for injuries or someone pushing if things go south with the two guys playing games. Goaltending is all over the place, so the smart play is get a bunch of probably fine options together and that is what this is.

2022 Offseason: Things start to get tight. Parayko hasn't played exceedingly well to earn much more than somewhere between Ellis and Spurgeon's contract, but that's still a decent 1.5-2mill raise. Halak will be gone, Husso will probably be gone and you can run Hofer in backup role by then. Perunovich and Kostin, unless they really break out, shouldn't cost much. Perron likely won't get a huge raise, despite his insane seasons, due to his age. Neighbors should be ready to step in. The path of least resistance is trading Sundqvist. I know that's an unpopular opinion to most Blues fans, but he's vastly overrated by this fanbase and he's got value around the league. He's fine, but not an integral must-keep part, and we can see that by our performance since he's been out, which has arguably been better than when he was in. Rosters have to evolve, and that's part of it.

Critique away.

They should sign Schwartz after expansion so they can protect Sundqvist

Also you could keep Scandella is Krug is exposed and selected by Seattle

Schwartz contract after expansion works too, just figured Seattle probably wouldn't go after Sundqvist with his injury.

Yeah if Krug goes I would keep Scandella, but I really don't think Krug will get selected even if he is exposed and I'd like to give that roster spot to Walman/Perunovich/Mikkola and spend the money on the forwards so Scandella was kind of my odd man out there. Don't think it's likely he'll get traded but think it would be good roster management.

I think Krug would be a guranteed producer for seattle if it gets to that point

Just for the record, we were 15-10-3 when Sunny played this season, 12-10-6 when he didn't. Of course, there many other factors that go into such things (for instance, Parayko was still out when Sunny got hurt in March) and correlation is not necessarily causation, but our record is clearly better when he plays.

True, hence the "arguably". Their record is better, but most of the Blues games post-Sundqvist's injury were against Vegas, Colorado, and Minnesota, which I think is fair to say was a much harder challenge than beating the ducks/kings/sharks like early in the season, but yeah can't put it all on him of course. My point was that everything doesn't fall apart when he's gone, and that seems to be the notion I hear a lot about him.

Well, again, I'd say Parayko/other key players being back and Binny getting riled up are the primary reasons for the late resurgence. It has nothing to do with Sunny being out.

I don't think it's as much a case of "everything falls apart when he's gone" as it is a case "we need him to reach our top gear". I'd definitely agree with the second one, and there's more than enough data to support that case.

Looks good to me; adding in the right places. I'm not sure how much this team can do against the younger, faster, superstar-driven teams. It's a bit concerning that the Blues don't seem headed toward "really good" or "really bad", but this is the play that Armstrong decided on, so these offseason moves make sense. Can't blow it up, just gotta keep pushing.

I agree it would be nice to get out of one of the Krug/Faulk contracts and have some long term cap flexibility. I think Krug will be more valuable than Faulk over the whole contract, but I think Dunn is already capable of doing what Krug does, and Walman and Perunovich are younger/cheaper offensive d-men that will push for minutes, so it's really a toss-up on which one to shed.

Now, let's talk about what will actually happen if they go full bonehead mode... Lose Dunn to expansion, draft a potential 4th liner 18th overall, extend Bozak 3x3, extend Sanford and play him in the top 6, let Schwartz walk, keep Husso as one of the worst backups in the league, finish in 17th place. This is my nightmare.

Well, if we're talking about "data", the data would say that Sundqvist is a perfectly fine defensive fourth liner who scores sometimes but mostly hurts our offense, and that we can probably find similar or better players for less than 2.75. The idea that we need him to reach our top gear is a gut feeling shared by a lot of blues fans and probably Blues management- and gut feelings are fine!- but it's really not supported by "the data". And data isn't everything, don't get me wrong, intangibles are real. I just don't know that he's really that guy.

I think there's also a significant risk with the way Sundqvist plays hockey that we're going to see diminishing returns and he's not helpful to us if he's always hurt. I get that this injury was kind of a freak accident but he spends a lot of time on the shelf.

Your nightmare and mine, my friend. This seems to be the direction we're heading, and I think with the way the other teams in our division are that pretty much slams the window shut.