The first 2 graphs attached show that it is the 7 peripheral regions that are by far the most important determinations of the Arctic sea ice maximum.
The 7 regions of of the Central Arctic all get close to 100% ice cover by the maximum, (though one or two, such as the Kara are starting to show less than 100% ice).
In contrast, the peripheral regions at maximum have lost just over 1 million km2 of sea ice area at maximum, i.e. over 4 times the land area of the UK or about 1.5 times the land area of Texas. One or two of those regions, e.g. Hudson Bay, do get completely ice covered, but most are displaying sea ice loss over time even at maximum.
In a recent post elsewhere, the importance of these peripheral seas was questioned. But surely 1 million Km2 of open water instead of ice must have some climatic impact, e.g. warmth and humidity of weather systems heading towards the Central Arctic passing over open water instead of an icy desert.
The obvious starting point is the minimum. The third graph is the September sea ice area monthly average. The contrast between this record low minimum compared with the high values in the Central Arctic is fairly impressive.
The end point is the maximum. I attach the March monthly average graph, which shows a linear long-term trend of a loss of 32k sea ice area annually.
To conclude, I have no idea whatsoever what the result will be in March 22.
All I have to offer is that every year CO2 ppm has risen and will continue to do so for a good few years yet.
click images to enlarge
