dry martini

Actually, the tell-tale indicator for first round RB busts is whether on day one of the draft, the Commissioner uses his name in the same sentence as the word "Chicago."

We can only hope that is the case should Henry not be traded. You cannot confine the analysis to the potential present and future lost value coming in should a Henry trade not materialize. Any value in trade coming in must be offset with the present value lost with Henry leaving. TD knows this. So, if WM goes down in week one and is lost for the season, not letting Travis go for a 4th round pick, conditional or not, suddenly becomes brilliant. Conversely, getting a LT and an additional pick may offset the lost "insurance" you're giving away with Henry. I have no problem with TD's approach.

I think the word you're looking for is no. Hillary

I though that at first as well. But upon further reflection, he just looks near-sighted. Which would explain a lot.

This is a no-brainer for me, as I seem to have retained my memory of the recent past. Pat Williams. 1999: No. 1 defense in league (3rd in yards given up per rushing attempt (YPRA)). Wade's 3-4, with Mt. Ted, or SS Washington or what have you, dominating the middle, ably spelled by young Pat, with occasional 4 man front with the two phatties. Also, we had a decent right end if memory serves. 2000: No. 3 defense in league (4th in YPRA). Same as above, but with even more phattie double teams, which as I recall, was simply thrilling to watch. Nothing got through. No drop off when Wiley steps in. Could it have something to do with the DTs. 2001: No. 21 defense in league. Bye-bye Ted. I was absolutely gutted when Ted was not resigned. Not surprisingly, poor Pat couldn't do it alone. 24th in league in YPRA. Was painful to watch given what we had come to expect. Admittedly, we also lost Wiley, but then he turned out to be a bit of a .... Ted, meanwhile, helped the Chi-town D go from 10th to 4th in YPRA and a 13-3 turnaround. Hell, even Wiley got selected to the PB. How would you feel seeing Pat get the nod next year as a member of (insert team name here). During the off-season, this board was overwhelmed with cries of "get Pat some help, sign big Sam." Then, following Sam's signing with Oakland, "well, he was a mercenary anyway, we have some young talent on the rise who might do the trick." 2002: No. 15 defense in league. Even with the switch to 4-3 full time, gave up too much up the middle as we remained 24th in YPRA. Poor Pat needed some help. Who is available in the draft, cause that young talent doesn't seem to be stepping up to the plate. Wait a minute, what's this ... Sam wants out of Oakland! 2003: No. 2 defense in league. 5th in YPRA. Hmmm. Oh yeah, some old buddy of Pat Williams joined him on a 4-man line. Reminiscent of the experimental Ted-Pat experience during the Wade years, except this was no experiment. Yeah, the offense didn't do their share, but it was a lot more fun to watch with the defense playing well. 2004: No. 2 defense in league. 3rd in YPRA. Pat + Sam = SMACK. Need I say more. Although the offense once again came up short, they have a lot of the tools in place, and showed signs of greatness, even with Drew's shortcomings. Because we have a run-first attitude, transitioning a new LT should be a bit easier. I've always like Jonas, but the overall value in this discussion goes to Pat. A strong run defense can keep you in games long enough to give your offense, no matter how poorly protected on the left, a chance to do something, especially with a running game. But an ineffective rush defense will keep your offense off the field, end of.

Your signature reminds me of that hilarious line from Mike Skinner's new cd "It's hard enough remembering my opinions without remembering my reasons for them."

Billeve?