Irony is always risky. That is why we have smilies - though I would happily ban them.
I can see a risk that the EU's unconstitutional(?) insistance on agreeing a divorce bill before anything else causing great delay, increasing the risk of no eventual deal.
It has to be correct that an agreed deal would be a very good thing, but logic dictates that not every possible deal offered would be better than no deal. Therefore in logic a no deal result might sadly be the best available. It is at this point that the Lib-dems and Labour depart entirely from this world and jump headfirst into a world in which any and every offer from the EU must, by some unidentified form of necessity, be better than no deal. Both parties have unequivocally said that a deal must be reached at all and any costs.
Some opponents of Brexit are attched to the EU by a sort of spiritual umbilical cord. Their attachment is so complete that they appear quite unable to consider the possibility of life out of the box. It is not that they have reached reasoned conclusion that we should stay in, but rather that to even suggest any life outside the EU is an impossibility.
For the BATNA point, the 'no deal' is the simplest and most likely of t he various scenarios. It must be thought through.