Besides that idea of an offensive against Kharkhov, I hear people expecting an offensive in Zaporozhia by the Russians. Starting any day now.
I don't believe these. I think Russians will be fine making Avdiivka another meatgrinder where they tie down and erode away Ukrainian manpower, ammo, and equipment, reducing their ability to put together another offensive force.
I also think they'll succeed in this, to the extent that they'll prevent the Ukrainian offensive entirely.
And on the longer run a third (after Bakhmut and Avdiivka) similar battle will be fought. Perhaps at Chasiv Yar or Siversk. After that Ukrainian manpower will be so drained that further resistance will be untenable and the losses will reach Western mainstream media reducing the support for further support.
Then Ukraine has to cut losses and sit down to the negotiating table. First they might replace Zelensky to someone who doesn't represent the "fighting till we take everything back" stance.

My problem with this scenario I presented is, that:
- Russia have to push for a solution that will prevent another war in Ukraine once and for all, or else she has to start another one in the near future (in a decade or two), and they started the war because the diplomatic solutions, the guarantees, the Minks agreements were like toilet paper in the first place. I think Realpolitik demands from them to securely close down things on this front.
- Europe has to push for a solution that'll prevent war in Ukraine once and for all.
Their solutions is very likely not what the other has in mind.
I think Russia wants a disarmed Ukraine which has similar status as Belarus. Where they can come and go, but westerners cannot. They could call it a DMZ. But EU wants Ukraine in the EU.
And then comes the US, who would like to see Ukraine in NATO (also in the EU would be suitable for her), but the US does not care enough and would settle with something that doesn't solve the issue, and will guarantee another war there.