Indefensible. 

There is no way for the Patriots to spin losing Wes Welker -- the greatest slot receiver in the history of the NFL, still in his prime and still hugely productive -- to the Denver Broncos for a total of $12 million over two seasons. 

Think about it: Six million bucks a season was too rich for Bill Belichick to keep a player with 672 catches over the last six seasons. Put it another way: The Patriots traded for Chad Ochocinco at $6 million for one season and let Welker walk at $6 million for two seasons. 

There is a hesitancy in questioning any football decision made by Belichick, and we all know why. But it's difficult to believe there isn't more here than just measuring the value of a slot receiver -- $6 million a year for two years (even if it's all guaranteed) of 100-plus catches and comfort for Tom Brady is a bargain by any definition. 

Nope, this at some level is personal. The "mild disdain" seems to be an undersell and seems to be mutual between Welker and Belichick. Albert Breer reported the Patriots -- owned by Robert Kraft, who told reporters Monday he wanted to Welker to be "a Patriot for life" -- offered Welker $10 million over two years (the contractual equivalent of the middle finger) and refused to budge when presented with a chance to match the Denver contract. There's lowballing and then there's this. It's obvious that Belichick didn't want Welker on the Patriots in 2013, or at the very least wasn't going to bend in the slightest to keep him around. 

Maybe we'll find out why at some point, but it won't come from Foxboro. Danny Amendola is the instant solution, and the folks who form the blindest wing of the In Bill We Trust Party will tell us he's a younger if not cheaper ($31 million over five years, $10 million guaranteed -- wasn't he supposed to be the lower-cost alternative, the guy ready to be plucked when Welker got that ridiculous offer from Jerry Jones or Jim Irsay?) Wes Welker. 

Amendola is a good receiver, he'll unquestionably put up numbers if he stays healthy. But that's where we arrive at the problem -- Amendola doesn't stay healthy. He's played in 12 games over the last two seasons, 20 less than Welker. And spare us all the idea that Amendola could replicate Welker's numbers, OK? No one is going to do that, because no one has ever done it before. Amendola -- without Tom Brady, understood -- has 196 catches and seven TD receptions in 42 career games. Welker has 195 catches and 10 touchdowns in the last year and a half. He'll be, at best, 70 percent of Welker at nearly the same price. How could he possibly be better, is he going to catch 130 passes? 

Where's the sense in choosing the unknown (with a greater, established injury risk) over what we've seen since 2007? Why mess around with extraordinary success? 

This could be spun if the Patriots were in some kind of salary cap pickle, but that's not close to reality. Assuming Welker was willing to stay at $12 million over two years, there would have been money to use on whatever needs Belichick wanted to address on either side of the ball. Welker wouldn't have been a prohibitive salary for at all for this team the next two years. 

The list of players who have been kicked to the curb by Belichick and come back to haunt the Patriots currently stands at zero. You can make the argument that Richard Seymour was a loss, that Asante Samuel could have been helpful, but there hasn't been a moment in any of the postseason losses since the last Super Bowl win where one could definitively point and say the outcome would have been different with Former Player X. 

But tell me it's a stretch to paint a scenario that has Welker catching 14 passes for 138 yards and a touchdown in an AFC Championship win over the Patriots with Amendola on the sideline with an injury. Let me ask this: Who do you think is going to lead the NFL in catches next season? I'm setting the over/under for Welker at 112.5 and for Amendola at 72.5. 

And I don't want to hear about how the Patriots never won a Super Bowl with Welker, that's irrelevant to this discussion. If the Welker of the last six years played for the 2001-04 teams you think they wouldn't have won three Super Bowls? And if David Tyree hadn't made his deal with the devil the MVP of Super Bowl XLII very possibly could have been Welker, who had 11 catches for 103 yards. Were there a pair of unfortunate drops in crucial situations the last two years? Sure, though I'd give Brady more blame for the failure against the Giants. But does anyone think Wes Welker got in the way of the Patriots winning a Super Bowl the last six years, a stretch that saw the Patriots put up four of the 13 highest-scoring seasons in league history? If Brady is Reason A for that remarkably proficient output, Welker is Reason B.

And now Wes Welker, who did everything the Patriots asked him to do over the last six seasons, is gone. He wasn't worth what Brian Hartline was worth to the Dolphins, or what Chad Ochocinco was worth to the Patriots in 2012, or what Danny Amendola will be worth for potentially the next five years. The Patriots -- and that means Bill Belichick, though it's hard to believe that Tom Brady was totally blind to this possibility, that strikes me as overly, historically naive -- don't think he's worth keeping around at below market value. 

It's the ultimate head-scratcher, a no-brainer gone wrong, and is as indefensible as Welker could prove to be when he faces Belichick and Patriots next season. This time, Bill Belichick dropped the ball.