Do Law Students Have an Undeserved Reputation as Lacking Bus

Yesterday, while I was writing about law students lack of the skills that law firms look for in associates--namely writing, teamwork and analytical skills--Vault's Senior Law Editor Brian Dalton was writing about how law students :

At The Lawyerist, a tech entrepreneur sends a message of hope to newly minted lawyers facing a bleak job market. From a businessman's perspective, law grads are "great hires":

If you made it through three years of law school, you're probably pretty smart, or at least know how to BS, which is one of life's most critical skills. You've been tried and tested, and you've survived a competitive and difficult environment. Stick-to-it-iveness is hard to come by. You exhibit pragmatism, choosing a career which, at least when you signed up for school, offered a solid life plan for employment.

You know how to write. You're a good communicator with a keen analytical mind. You can sift through mountains of information and pick out key pieces of salient details. In fact, you learned ideal high-level, general skills that can help you in any industry or business in the modern marketplace. We're in an information age, and your training equipped you better than most on how to make decisions in an increasingly noisy and complicated world.

What do you think? Do law students, and by extension law schools, have a bad, undeserved reputation as theory-wonks? Or are new JDs really unprepared to enter the legal industry? Are law schools doing their students a disservice by not admitting they are, ultimately, vocational schools? What say you, blogosphere?