The issue is you are still treating the trade as a random (in terms of winning) event.
It's why you're post #25 above is wrong. You want to label everything as 'a plan'. It's about having a plan for winning.
We can put all of the generic labels on process all we want to feel better about whatever, but the reality is that at some point you have to make choices. They won't be perfect choices (they never are) but the job is to make the best choices you can and (if the goal is winning a Championship) get after it. Have depth. Be dynamic. When things don't go right, adjust.
...you have 9 positions (yes, DH) and a pitching staff and you have to figure out what you want. You'll need 40+ guys for 26 spots, injuries happen. Performance isn't linear like we like to pretend.
IF Mancini is part of that, then you have to figure other things out.
IF you want to use Mancini to solve another issue (like 2B, SS or 3B) then you leverage Mountcastle. You get to the point in development and experience where you have to commit and at the rules of Baseball don't allow to just keep everyone.
So much wrong with this drivel but I'll address a couple of points.
1. Just because I am talking the ins and outs of a potential Mancini trade does NOT mean its done in a vacuum. This thread is about Mancini and thats what I and everybody else on this thread is talking about.
2. My post #25 is not wrong its an opinion. Its wrong to you because you don't think what I said fits YOUR definition of a plan for winning.
I am frankly amazed with your in depth knowledge of how to run a baseball team that you aren't selling your talents to the highest bidder.