Libertarian Librarian

Actually, overall I'd say this week's Monday Morning Quarterback is better than any of his other 2005 entries. He starts it out with an interesting theory: namely, that lower picks in the first round, as well as second round picks, are a better value than top picks in round 1. Early first round picks tend to be extremely expensive, and often put a lot of pressure on a team's salary cap, while the return on that investment is iffy, since a goodly number of early first rounders are merely good (not great), and more than a few are complete washouts. His analysis is not completely convincing, but it certainly is an interesting take-- especially given that my team, the Packers, may well be headed for a top 10 draft pick in the 2006 draft.

The rest of the column is okay to good. With two exceptions. The first is when King puts the Eagles at #4 (highest ranked NFC team) and the Patriots at #5 in his top 15 teams column. To which my natural, and very thoughtful, response is... huh? McNabb looks like one of the living dead out there, the Eagles have no running game, and the defense has been exposed at times this year. #4? Ahead of Tampa Bay? Ahead of Cincinnati? Ahead of Dallas, who waxed them last week? I think you can make a pretty good case that Philly isn't even the best team in its division, right now, much less the best team in the conference. And the Patriots? 3-3, and a miracle finish in Pittsburgh away from being below .500. Half the team is in the infirmary, and I do think they are still adjusting to the loss of both the offensive and defensive coordinators during the off-season. Top 15, okay-- they still have Brady, and they still put together at least a few drives every game that remind you of just how dominant they were last year-- but not top 5. Not in front of Tampa and Cincinatti for certain, and probably not in front of Jacksonville, Dallas, Washington and maybe Pittsburgh and Carolina.

Exception two. On page 4 of the article, King makes the following truly mind-boggling statement during his listing of things he liked this weekend:

Warrick Dunn. He slipped and fell on a third-quarter carry at the Alamodome, got up, and bulled for six yards. Overall, I can't name three backs in football better than Dunn, try as I do almost every week.

Ease back on the espresso shots, Pete! You're clearly losing your mind. Dunn is a borderline great back, and one who is generally undervalued. Fast, great receiver, makes excellent cuts, good vision, and tough enough despite his fairly diminutive frame. But the third best running back in football? Please.

Ladanian Tomlinson is clearly #1, and Shaun Alexander is probably right behind him. Those two are 1 and 2 in yards rushing and touchdowns, with LT getting the edge because he's such a good receiver. So, King wants us to believe that Dunn is better than Edgerrin James? Priest Holmes? Hmmm.... don't think so. If you were starting a franchise would you rather have Dunn, or Julius Jones? Tiki Barber? Willis McGahee? Cadillac Williams? Rudi Johnson? Domanick Davis? Duece McAllister? Maybe, but I think that a strong case can be made that ALL of those guys are better than Dunn. And then there are guys like Brian Westbrook, Lamont Jordan, Clinton Portis, etc., etc.

You really have to think about what you write, Peter. And if you honestly can't think of three running backs better than Warrick Dunn, perhaps you should consider covering field hockey. Good grief.