The best case scenario is an in-season trade of Barbashev Sanford or Blais

Arguments for each:

Barbashev: Full disclosure- I love Ivan Barbashev. His advanced stats are abysmal, and I'm a big computer boy. In this case, I don't care. If he's cheap enough, I want him on this team. The problem is that on his next deal he'll likely be looking for roughly Sundqvist money, which in a flat cap world is not cheap for a fourth liner, especially when we're already paying Sundqvist money to *checks notes* Oscar Sundqvist. With guys like Clifford and (hopefully) MacEachern and Kostin on the roster in the future, his "intagibles" are mostly replaceable for less. He scores enough that we can get something for him too.

Sanford: I've been in favor of trading Sanford for awhile. He had a really good year last year so his value is as high as its ever been. I also think his production last year was unsustainable and significantly overhyped considering 1/3 of his goals came in one game. But even if I'm wrong about that, every aging curve would suggest that Sanford is hitting his peak right now at 26. And while some players occasionally defy that- Perron, you might say- if this or even a little more than this is Sanford's peak, he's not going to be outplaying Schwartz or Schenn for a top-six LW spot anytime soon. He's also going to command a decent amount on his next deal, with arb rights- probably about Hintz money- and that money is better spent elsewhere. He's also Seattle's clear best pick and if we want them to take someone like Scandella, Perron or Faulk (wishful thinking), we need to remove their better options. Long story short- he's not good enough to be in our top six, he'll be too expensive to play in our bottom six, and we've got a cap issue to solve, so we might as well.

Blais: I love Sammy Blais as much as I love Barabshev. He's got lots of upside BUT he's not much younger than Sanford at 24 so his time to show that he's something more than a bottom-six guy is now. That's gonna be tough considering he's not projected to make the opening night roster. He's had some injury trouble in the past that's held him back and he doesn't score much so that hurts his trade value. In reality, his upside is probably not much more than 20-25 points, but there's still time to surprise in a Sanford-esque way. The good news? He's cost controlled for the next two years instead of just this season. He's probably never going to perform well enough to be in the top six, but that also means he'll probably never cost as much either. At the same time, the window is now and he doesn't have a spot in the lineup. There's cheaper guys to scratch. If you want to trade a guy with as little disruption to the talent of our regular lineup as possible, he's probably it.