If we win the Cup then we will give Halák a big contract. Otherwise, I think we look to try and get him on something more reasonable (4 x $4.5m). If he isn't interested in that then we'll move onto other options.
Going after goalies in FA is going to mean either overcommitting to a good goalie (both in terms of money & years) or getting a backup and hoping Allen steps up. Armstrong had a choice to sell low on Halák or sell low on Perron and we know the option he took. I don't believe that he'll suddenly believe that Allen is ready to be a starter next season when he didn't this season.
If Halák isn't brought back then I imagine that we'll try and trade for someone like Neuvirth or Bernier/Reimer. No long term commitment, lower financial cost, the goalie trade market isn't going to be huge and we'll have 2 shots at finding our next starter.
Unless we trade for Miller before the end of the season, in which case all the above is meaningless and we'll have Miller/Allen next season.
And next year, Allen IS on a 1-way contract. With Bishop showing top value with the Bolts this year, gurantee another team might give up some good help if, for anything else, to see if lightning strikes twice.
Mind that I'd rather see Allen in the Note, but if the right deal comes up, I can't see Army saying no.
None of what you are saying is logical. We signed Allen to a 1 way contract because we wanted him on a 1 way contract.
Elliott has had 2 shots at the playoffs and we have went nowhere. He wasn't to blame, but it was pretty clear he wasn't a difference maker. Allen might be that difference maker and he is a cheaper option next season.
The only reason we traded Ben Bishop is because we were forced to. Halák and Elliott were amazing and Bishop was an UFA at the end of the season, once Elliott accepted a cheap 2 year contract then we had to move Bishop. There is no similarity to this situation at all.