So the "simple" solutions others propose that resemble typical trades can be dismissed as you usually do, and the incredibly convoluted trades you seem to admit are extremely unlikely to ever happen are an important subject for discussion? Doesn't that kind of seem backwards?
Your attempt to create a false narrative seeking to throw shade on me will not work.
Every situation is different but they all depend on the merits.
In some isolated cases, a simple solution can work b'c the underlying problem is actually simple.
Howev, that is rare, if we are being honest.
More typically you have either
a situation which is inherently complicated at day 1, square 1
OR
a simple problem that can accept a simple solution, but it is in vacuum, and getting out of the vacuum requires it interfacing with other problems requiring their own solutions, which results in the need to create at least one scenario where all the problems can be solved using different [i.e., non duplicative] assets.
So sure, other than God Who is absolute, everyone/everything else is at least to some degree relative.
Hence there may reasonably be presumed to be an exception to every rule.
But what I said, as a rule, was correct.
As that relates here, to the board, rarely do our teams have so much depth, etc., that one or even two moves in a vacuum will solve all issues.
Usually, correcting one issue is at cost to something else, and at some point that piper gets paid.
peace out
