Re: static vs. dynamic waza
I think they both teach different things, and I really see it as a subset/superset kind of thing.
In static, you can learn to manage the forces and potential forces that are in any given state. You can become comfortable in all the states that commonly occur. You can study them and work on them diligently.
In dynamic training, you can't (easily) study/learn any of that. Instead what becomes the obvious focus is motion, momentum, and kinetic energy. So I say, first static and then dynamic:
You can bring everything you have learned in static into the dynamic training.. but not the other way around. (so working in a dynamic type interaction means doing all the good stuff you do in static PLUS other stuff like momentum work.)
So I agree with most of what has been said. But one thing I would disagree with is that "blending" is learned mostly or entirely in the dynamic type of training. Can't blending of structures and the forces they produce be done very thoroughly in static? That's what I use static training for.