Still doesn’t answer my question. He’s going to be gone no matter what. What’s the difference when it happens? If Lehtera can be traded, so can Jake Allen.
And making your team better is never “bad business”.
It definitely answers your question, the answer just isn't convincing to you, seemingly because you're convinced that Allen is gone. What's your proof? Why can't he just remain the back-up?
Of course Allen can be traded. But if you examine your example, the Lehtera trade, he was moved in a deal for Schenn, in which the Blues upgraded a position of need. If the Blues don't have to pay someone to take Allen, or they can't clearly benefit by doing so, they're not going to bother doing it. Overpaying to get a rental backup is a potential benefit, but not a very clear benefit. And those types of unloading deals tend to happen in the off-season rather than at the deadline.
"Making your team better" in this case is extremely relative. If you have to send valuable draft picks or prospects to get such a deal done, you're losing assets, which is how you keep your team good. And if you're doing that, why not upgrade a position of greater importance?
I'm all in favor of moving Allen, but you're the one who believes it's a foregone conclusion that he's gone, yet
I'm the one who has to convince
you it's unlikely that the Blues manage to trade him for a rental for an extra price Armstrong will pay?