The intelligence is at best 1 week out from HQ – a situation not seen routinely since roughly the mid 19th century on earth – if not 2-6 weeks out from the general HQ.
You can predict the bottlenecks; you can't predict when you'll NEED the forces for defensive purposes, and any forces not with you add additional weeks comm time.
Under the situations of the mid 19th C, there were battles fought well after the war was over. It was worse in the early 19th - A battle took place over 2 months after the armistice, having started 3 weeks after the armistice, between units that had been sent out well before hand, and word was not able to be sent to even relatively nearby units to go defend the city of New Orleans, nor was higher command able to send the recall in time.
All assertions of capabilities based upon modern warfare need to be examined closely for the impact of the OTU's utter lack of effective communications. You don't appear to have even given the slightest considerations of the command lag times.
The general staff can, with good intel, predict where attacks will come, if active hostilities are ongoing and correct data about enemy forces is present - but that's not going to be the case in the OTU. The data will be weeks out of date, the Imperial general staff is 3-6 months away from the borders, the Sector general staff up to a month away... and battle reports equally so.
Think of playing stratego, but having to order a piece between 2 and 4 turns ahead, and until a like number of turns later, not knowing if it won or lost. That's the reality of the sector command staff, even if they're near the front (as was the case with Santanocheev and Norris).
Sure I considered Command Lag and it doesn't matter. I'll assume, for instance, you were referring to the Battle of New Orleans at first. Command Lag had NOTHING to do with WHERE the battle took place; it was a given.
It didn't matter WHEN the battle took place, again, it was a given that it would take place. It is unfortunate that it occurred after the war was over but that was TIME LAG not Command Lag.
The battle took place where it had to. The WHEN had nothing to do with it. The same situation will/would occur in Traveller. (Again due to TIME LAG.) Sooner, or latter, an invading force will come to a certain point. If you accurately predict that point and mass adequate forces, you will prevail.
That was, and is, my assertion. Fast Tenders will allow you to draw on rear area
reserves and mass them accordingly. Note the word reserves; I'm NOT talking about dividing battle fores and tying them up. I'm talking about EFFECTIVELY relocating your
reserves.
"intelligence is at best 1 week out" doesn't mean
dinky do regarding an opponents Order of Battle and especially his ship types and capabilities.
Wars are not planed on what you, or your enemy,
WANT to do, but on what they
CAN do.
A good commander forces battle on his enemy at the place of his choosing. Those places are often decided on geography and topography. History is full of accidental engagements, sometimes very decisive, but wars are won primarily on planed and prepared fields of battle.
Due to TIME LAG a Traveller style of war will be fought, and deployment will be, "economy of force". You, of economic necessity, will have holding and fixing fores on the front. Proper, timely and accurate deployment of reserves will be the deciding factor.
. 
