No. Here's why:
We don't have to. This isn't an either/or deal. It's a gamble at it's core, bases off incomplete information.
What can DEN say that would make us want to "sweeten" the deal? Truly. What could they possibly do or say that they already haven't that would change the core premise, influencing themselves, Melo, and us on the outside?
The reason the tide has turned (not that it hasn't always been this way) and now it seems like DEN is resigned to seriously making a deal with us, those torrid seemingly inevitable NJN deals shriveled along with all else,
Is bc DEN has the weakest hand in this poker game. There is no reason for us to take mercy, and hedge our bet, throwing in Gallo to try to seal the deal with an extra degree of liklihood.
That is a bad gamble; or a sub-optimal one. Even if it still a good proposition for us, technically, because we will be improved by the deal.
Most are very unrefined in their savvy and experience, re: probability, odds, 'gambles', and the theory behind it all. So we may unnecessarily "sweeten" this deal, fooled by a notion of "locking Melo up" and assuaging DEN.
Say we do that. And we up this ante. Why doesn't DEN just demand more? The landscape moved when we did. Game is reset. Why not have to sweeten it further?
DEN has the last decision in a match where only they and Melo stand to lose. DEN incidentally has the most to lose if Melo simply walks. Having the last decision sits them with a loaded gun pointed at themselves, maybe a couple chambers blank, and DEN having to honestly pull the trigger with the barrel pointed inches between their eyes.
