I've seen this point or something like it posted before, but it's worth reiterating. There is an either/or here.
Either:
Ainge's draft board doesn't look like the internet consensus and looks like this...
1. Jackson
2. Fultz/Ball/Tatum
3. Fultz/Ball/Tatum
4. Fultz/Ball/Tatum
...in which case, getting any additional lotto 1st next year is gravy for trading down, with anything more being gravy-on-top-of-gravy. In other words, of course we do a deal and pick our top-rated prospect anyway.
Or:
We're not impressed by this draft at all and we're looking to trade out of this draft altogether for a veteran star (Butler, George, whomever) but that we think sending out the #1 overall is too high a price and that the #3 would still get the job done, that we'd be leaving value on the table if we sent #1, so Ainge is trying to squeeze as much value as possible out of the situation first, thereby getting the veteran star we want but also getting that extra lotto gravy, too.
There isn't another scenario. It's one or the other. Right?
Ainge hasn't made a major mistake trade-wise yet, in fact he's won all major trades by a landslide, and he hasn't made a major talent evaluation error at the top of the draft yet, so I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt, whichever the scenario is.