Six Points: Cavs 94, Pacers 73

Was this a game or a scrimmage? The Cavs stomped the Pacers in Indianapolis last night, and it often felt more like a varsity/junior varsity game than an NBA contest.

LeBron James had 13 assists and scored 22 points in spite of a bad shooting night, and Shaq poured in 22 points in less than 25 minutes as the Pacers had no answer for the big man down low. As opposed to Wednesday night's game against the Timberwolves, which was close for over a quarter, the Cavs came out guns blazing and doubled up the Pacers 36-18 in the first quarter.

From that point on, the game was never in doubt. That first quarter beat down clearly broke the Pacers' will, and not to question their professionalism, but they didn't appear to be giving 100% effort for the rest of the game. In that type of game against a clearly superior opponent, a team like the Pacers can try to fight back, which would probably prompt another onslaught by the opposition's starters, or they can go through the motions for the last 36 minutes and hit the showers. Teams that are 16-30 tend to fold when you hit them with a first quarter haymaker, and the Pacers helped illustrate that last night.

1. Cruise control.
After several tough games that came down to the final minutes, it's nice for the Cavs to have a handful of games that they can win comfortably. That was the case against Minnesota and Indiana, and four of the Cavs' next five include home dates against the LA Clippers, Memphis, New York, and New Jersey. Those could all be easy wins if the Cavs don't play sloppy first halves.

The Cavs don't go back on the road until after the All-Star break. Other than the four games I just mentioned, the Cavs also face off against the Heat and the Magic at The Q. If they can take care of business against the four weaker opponents and split against the two Florida squads, they should be pleased with where they stand at the break. And even if they only go 4-2 during this stretch, that wouldn't be the worst thing in the world considering their injuries at guard.

2. Speaking of injuries...
Losing Mo Williams and Delonte West definitely hurt, but as long as nobody else goes down the Cavs should be able to play through it for awhile. This is one of the softest stretches in their schedule, plus they'll have the All-Star break to let these guys heal up some more.

We know that Mo Williams' shoulder injury is going to sideline him until early or mid-March, but less is known about Delonte West's fractured left ring finger. Delonte is still listed as day-to-day, and while my gut tells me that he'd be in there if this were the playoffs, I wonder if it doesn't make more sense to just shut him down until after the All-Star break. With their soft upcoming schedule, a 3-3 split looks like a worst case scenario, while 4-2 or 5-1 are both very realistic. With the Cavs up a comfortable 5.5 games in the East, I'd be conservative and let Delonte come back whenever he's truly 100%.

As is often the case in the NBA, one of the Cavs' biggest enemies heading into the playoffs is going to be their collective health. You want to see everybody peaking in mid-April, but that's usually easier said than done. Shaq's playing his best basketball of the season, and ideally you'd like to throw him on ice a la Walt Disney until May, but that's not an option because cryogenic freezing is very expensive and you usually pay by the pound.

Hopefully Mo Williams and Delonte West are getting the injury bugs out of their respective systems and will be ready to roll come April. We saw injuries derail a tough Celtics team last season, and Mike Brown should control his starters' minutes (especially Shaq's) in hope of avoiding a similar fate.

3. An All-Star for at least one night.
You could make very legitimate arguments for either Shaq O'Neal or Anderson Varejao to make the All-Star team as reserves over Atlanta's Al Horford, largely based on the Cavaliers' success as a team. Then again, New York's David Lee and New Jersey's Brook Lopez have even better arguments. Don't sweat the All-Star Game - it's not the Pro Bowl, but it's still a pretty big waste of time.

In Indiana, Shaq played like an All-Star for at least one night, filling it up with 22 points, 8 boards, and 2 blocks in under 25 minutes of play. The Pacers simply had no answer for the Big Diesel underneath. Shaq went to the line 12 times, and that number easily could have been 20.

They are very different players, but Shaq's dominance in Indianapolis reminded me of how Jermaine O'Neal used to torch the Cavs whenever they squared off against the Pacers. When Jermaine was in his prime he owned Zydrunas Ilgauskas in the post, and for a few years the Cavs had a ton of trouble with the Pacers. The shoe's on the other foot now. Just think - there was a time when the Cavs couldn't figure out how to win in Conseco Fieldhouse. You've come a long way, baby.

4. Mediocrity breeds mediocrity.
It isn't some huge secret that in the NBA, you want to be either really good, or really bad. The concept is that you want to be competing for a title or you want to be losing enough games to get lots of ping pong balls for the lottery and be a position to draft the next MJ, Kobe, LeBron, etc. Cavs fans can testify to the fact that one guy can turn a franchise around in the NBA, so if you're going to lose, you want to go down like the Titanic.

Unfortunately for Pacers fans, the team doesn't seem to get the message. The Pacers won 36 games the last two seasons, 35 games in '06-'07, and 41 in '05-'06. They're usually good enough to either sneak into the playoffs or be eliminated late in the season, which makes it tough to draft an impact player.

Consider the Pacers' three first round picks over the last two years: Tyler Hansbrough (#13 - 2009), Roy Hibbert (#17 - 2008), and Brandon Rush (via trade for Jerryd Bayless, who was #11 in 2008). Those are three quality guys who I'd like to stash away on the Cavs' roster. But all of those guys (except Hansbrough, who is worse) are just marginal starters on a bad team, and would be the 7th or 8th guy on a good team.

When you continually draft in the teens, there simply aren't many franchise players available, and you're chances of getting the few that slide down there are minimal. It's a tough pill to swallow, but the Pacers probably have to take their medicine for a season or two so that they can draft a quality counterpart to the excellent Danny Granger.

5. Daniel Gibson: pseudo point guard.
I like that Mike Brown seems to have learned his lesson with Daniel Gibson - the guy simply isn't a point guard. Gibson is an undersized two who can come in and make threes. A player like that has value to the Cavs, and I was worried that with Mo and Delonte on the shelf, Brown would once again try to stuff a square peg into a round hole.

That hasn't been the case so far. Gibson can handle the ball well enough if a situation calls for that, but the Cavs seem content to run a point guard by committee and also let LeBron handle the ball more in the absence of the starters. Daniel Gibson finally seems to be re-establishing a role in the rotation, and you don't want to screw that up by restarting a failed experiment. Hopefully Delonte West can return soon to take some pressure off of Gibson and LeBron.

6. LeBron: DPOY?
There's been talk this week about LeBron James and Anderson Varejao as candidates for Defensive Player of the Year. Without getting off on a tangent about the meaningless of these awards, it's going to be difficult for Varejao to win because he's not a "starter." Varejao plays more minutes than JJ Hickson, but the fact that he starts the game on the bench may bias some voters against him. The fact that he's still viewed by many as a "flopper" in spite of the incredible development of his defensive game won't help, either.

LeBron is a different story. He has enough of a defensive highlight reel that you could definitely make a good case for him as DPOY, but Brian Windhorst pointed out that voters will likely be biased against him because he seems like a slam dunk to win his second consecutive MVP award.

Plus, I don't buy LeBron as the best defender in the league. That's an award that should go to a low post defender who guards the rim, and the best in the league right now is probably Dwight Howard. We saw firsthand how you have to game plan around Howard in last year's Eastern Finals, and he will probably earn his second DPOY award as he's leading the league in blocks and swats.

Now, LeBron as the best help defender in the league? That's a position I could champion. Nobody comes out of thin air more often to pin a ball to the backboard, and nobody will come close to matching LBJ in chase down blocks this season. LeBron has finally put his freakish athleticism to work on the defensive end during the last two seasons, and it's been a joy to watch.

LeBron gave us one of those moments last night in the fourth quarter when Brandon Rush was driving the lane for what seemed like an easy layup. LeBron moved towards the hoop, faked a jump for a block, and drew enough of Rush's attention that he missed an easy layup. My guess is that won't be the first time LeBron has that effect on an opponent.

Up next: 1/31, Los Angeles Clippers, 6:00

(Photo Ron Hoskins/Getty Images)

LBJ=MVP

A couple of quick notes from the Cavs' win over the Heat in Miami last night:

- That's five straight for Los Caballeros now, including the last three without starting point guard and 2nd-leading scorer Mo Williams and two without backup PG/SG Delonte West. Their only blemish in the past eight games was that heartbreaker in Utah. Bonus points if you can name that fellow who hit the game-winner for the Jazz.

- You do realize our starting backcourt is Daniel Gibson and Anthony Parker, right? That speaks volumes about the production we're getting from our frontline players.

- In particular: LeBron James. The MVP debate for this season isn't even open anymore: it's the King. Look at the last two games, particularly the endgame scenarios (ignoring, if you will, the 69 points he poured in for a shorthanded Cav squad against two plus-.500 clubs). Against OKC, all he did was drive and kick for the game-winning shot then block Kevin Durant's retaliation attempt. Against Miami, all he did was make a steal, take it all the way to the other end, hit two FT's for a one-point lead, then force Dwyane Wade into a shot that missed to give the Cavs the win.

Nobody is playing better than this guy at both ends of the floor. I can't see a legitimate argument for anyone else as tops in the league.

- Heat fans nevertheless seem to think it's their guy Wade, evidenced by the M-V-P chants that went up in the first half after he made a shot and was fouled in the process. I noticed that these chants ceased after he bricked the FT, and never resurfaced in a second half in which he went 1-8 shooting and scored just two points.

- This despite the fact that Wade gets a preposterous number of calls. I felt like I was rewatching the '06 Finals last night. Cleveland players couldn't even look at D-Wade funny last night, lest they get whistled. That might have been the worst-officiated Cavalier contest of the season.

- The most concerning call: not getting Wade for goaltending at the end as he grabbed onto the rim after decking LeBron while LeBron's shot was in the air. How do you miss that call? LeBron kept saying to the officials, "he grabbed the rim, man!" with apparently no explanation from the zebras. Ridiculous. I would have been furious had they lost.

But they didn't. Because they have the real MVP.

Leadership, Cavalier-style

Can I interest you in a look at the NBA's league leaders in various statistical categories? What if I told you there were lots of Cavaliers there - how about then? I thought so. We never get to do this during Browns season, because Browns players have long been regarded as Fantasy Football poison, and we usually have an Indian leading the league in ERA who gets summarily traded, so that's no fun. But, focus: NBA leaders! Cavs!

Points
It's 'Melo and LeBron in a dead heat at the top at 29.7 ppg. The King shoots a higher percentage (.510 to .469), though Anthony hits more foul shots (.861 to .781). I've never been a big Carmelo fan, but I think it's time I appreciated his game a little more. As for LeBron's scoring - I love that he can put the ball in the basket, but I think the Cavs are at their best when he's putting up 20/10/10 numbers instead of having to hit for 30+ every night. As I write this, LeBron just made two ridiculous threes at the end of the half to put the Cavs up 13 on the Thunder.

A few surprises at the top: Monta Ellis in 6th, Gilbert Arenas 10th (I'm too lazy to make a "shooting" joke), hopefully-future-Cav Antawn Jamison in 11th, and Tyreke Evans leading all rookies in 14th at 20.9 ppg. Other than LeBron, no Clevelander cracks the top 40, with Mo Williams 42nd at 16.9. Speaking of Mo, I sprained my shoulder once, and man did that ever hurt. I couldn't sleep on it for six months. I hope Mo didn't do it as badly as I did.

Rebounds
Dwight Howard leading here, whatever. But who saw this great season from Crazy Zach Randolph (11.5 rpg) coming? For what it's worth, I love the nickname Z-Bo for him. A neat NBA story this year is Charlotte's Gerald Wallace suddenly grabbing four more boards a game to crack the top 5 at 11.3 rpg. He's only 6'7"!

The Cavs are an interesting study here. They're a tough rebounding club though they're just 14th overall in total rebounds. More importantly, their excellent +4.4 rebounding differential trails only Memphis. (Golden State is far, far and away worst at a preposterous -8.9. How do you expect to win any games like that?). Yet the Cavs owe their rebounding prowess to solid teamwork, fundamentals, and the limited shots they allow opponents rather than a single dominant rebounding force; Anderson Varejao leads the club at 8.1, just 29th in the Association. Below that you have LeBron (7.1, 34th) and Shaq (6.7, 41st).

Assists
You already know the Cavalier offense isn't one driven by a great point guard like Chris Paul (11.3, 1st) or Steve Nash (11.2, 2nd). But we do have this guy who's pretty good at passing named LeBron James, whose 7.8 per game places him 7th in the NBA. You may be interested to learn that everyone else in the top 30 is a guard (Hedo Turkoglu at 4.5 is the next-highest big man). LeBron James is talented.

FG%
Kendrick Perkins leads the league at an astounding .638 clip. Wow. He would certainly be a scoring option on the NBA's all-ugly team (along with Turkoglu, Rajon Rondo, Chris Kaman, and Joakim Noah). Second place is Gasol at .608. That would be Marc Gasol of the Grizzlies - brother Pau is 14th at .540. Shaq leads the Cavs at .529 (19th), followed by, yep, LeBron, at a highly efficient .510 (25th). Dunking all the time will do that for a fellow's numbers. Varejao is at .519 but apparently doesn't qualify.

FT%
Mo Williams' 89.7% paces the Cleveland club and is good for 5th in the NBA. Steve Nash is hitting a preposterous 94.3% of his foul shots. Color me impressed. Of course, Toronto's Jose Calderon set the league mark last year at 98.1% (!!!), but I think fell short of enough attempts to qualify. He's at a pedestrian 81.8% this season.

No other Cav makes the league's top 50. Did I mention we're not a guard-driven team?

3-point %
Or maybe we are! Cavalier guards Daniel Gibson (.483) and Anthony Parker (.477) are 1-2 in the league, with Williams in 8th at .429. That's Mo, not Jawad Williams. Jawad's is roughly half of that. Of course, he doesn't have too many attempts, so the Cavs as a team still lead the league in 3-point percentage.

Steals
LeBron, 16th at 1.57, Mo 35th at 1.21. Does this have any bearing on team success?

Blocks
Howard leads the league, but should have an asterisk for how many of his end up in the stands rather than the hands of teammates. Shaq (1.08), LeBron (1.01), and Varejao (1.00) clock in at 33rd, 38th, and 39th for Cleveland.

Fouls
If Shaq (3.1) and Z (2.9) were one big man, they would foul out every game. Thought you might want to know that.

Chasedown blocks
I assume LeBron is tops in this. Can someone get Elias on the horn?

Charges
Repeat previous comment with Varejao.

Turnovers
Uh-oh, LeBron has a little bit of a chink in his armor, turning the ball over 3.6 times a game, 5th in the league. I suppose when you play 1-on-5 as much as the King does, you'll lose the ball here and there.

Hammer Throwing-Downs
I don't need to tell you who's #1 here.

The Man in the Mirror

If you had told me two years ago that Braylon Edwards would soon ascend the Mount Rushmore of Cleveland sports villains, I would not have believed you. In fact, I probably would've used some choice words to accuse you of blasphemy.

But after two years of questionable effort, mind-numbing drops, and constantly running his yap, Edwards "punched" his ticket to New York. Now, bad puns and all, Braylon Edwards just won't go away.

Earlier this week, Edwards thanked Eric Mangini for trading him to the Jets, a not-so-thinly-veiled jab at Mangini. In the wee hours of Saturday morning, Tony Grossi posted excerpts from a phone interview with Edwards' father, former NFL player Stanley Edwards, which once again made Browns fans shake their heads.

The elder Edwards said plenty of things, but the general thesis of his interview with Grossi was that Browns fans hate Braylon Edwards because he went to Michigan. We've seen Braylon bang this drum before, but it's good to know that it's not just him - the rest of his family is certifiable, too.

Let's settle this once and for all. There were various reasons why Browns fans learned to hate Braylon Edwards, and the fact that he attended that school up north had absolutely nothing to do with it. Contrary to Braylon and Stanley Edwards' distorted beliefs, not all Cleveland Browns fans are Ohio State honks.

As far as D-1 football in concerned, many Browns fans support the Buckeyes. Beyond them, there are large contingents that pull for Notre Dame, and plenty who support - gasp - Michigan. Some aren't interested in college football. But none of that matters, because we all have one common team that we want to succeed, and that team is the Cleveland Browns.

Of course there are a handful of fans on the fringe that would probably like to see 53 Ohio State alumni suit up for the Browns every week, but those fans are are in the micro-minority. Those fans also aren't very bright, because a team of 53 Buckeyes wouldn't fare very well on Sundays.

I'm an Ohio State fan (as well as a Penn State fan, which positions me solidly as a college sports polygamist), but when it comes to the Browns, college football allegiances have precisely zero effect on what I think is best for the team.

When the Browns picked Brian Robiskie in the second round of last year's draft, I was furious because it was the wrong pick. When the Browns drafted Braylon Edwards, I was pleased. I knew that Edwards was a really talented guy, and I always want to see talented players wearing orange and brown, whether they played college ball for (the) Ohio State University, the University of Michigan, or the University of Iraq.

I can't speak for everyone, but some of the reasons why I hate Braylon Edwards include his poor performance given his draft position, his endless drops, his constant chatter (which was never backed up on the field), his bloated contract (nearly $8 million per), and the fact that he wasn't exactly Pete Rose in the hustle department. If you're a great player, fans are willing to forgive quite a few warts, but Edwards wasn't a good player within the contexts of his draft position and fat rookie contract. Thus, Browns fans didn't like him.

Stanley Edwards' comments not only show us that Braylon's dad is a few cards short of a full deck, but they also give us a little glimpse into what made Braylon into the spoiled brat he is today.

At the risk of turning this column into a transcript of Dr. Phil, I don't think it's too presumptuous to say that Braylon Edwards' misbehavior was constantly enabled by his father. It's probably a safe bet that in the Edwards household, nothing was ever Braylon's fault. It wasn't Braylon's fault that he flunked the test; the teacher just didn't do a good job. It wasn't Braylon's fault that he wrecked the car; the road was poorly marked. And it wasn't Braylon's fault that he failed in Cleveland; the mean Browns fans just didn't like him.

As a matter of fact, some of Braylon's problems on the field might be linked to this phenomenon. We all know people who don't take ownership for their mistakes and shortcomings, and failure to do so comes with consequences. Braylon Edwards is one such person.

If someone never takes ownership for his mistakes, he's unlikely to say "I'm not very good at something, so I'm going to work really hard to improve." People like that lack mental fortitude. Would it make sense for a guy like that to show poor work ethic on the football field? If a guy like that started to drop the football, could you see him becoming a head case who suddenly can't catch anything? Does this sound painfully familiar?

Leroy Hoard and Aaron Shea went to Michigan. I liked those guys. Then again, neither of them were arrogant jerks who dropped passes or punched people.

Braylon Edwards is a loser who blames his problems on everyone but himself. Edwards is mentally soft and no matter how deeply he buries that fact, he knows it. He overcompensates with arrogance and false bravado. In spite of being dragged to the AFC Championship by a Jets team that plays great defense and runs the football effectively, Edwards will never be a core player on a championship team.

Browns fans don't like Braylon Edwards. At this point, nothing short of a miracle will change that. But it's not because of where he went to college, his haircut, or what type of cereal he ate for breakfast. If Braylon wants to know why we don't like him - and odds are that he doesn't really want to know - he can take a page out of Michael Jackson's book, and start with the man in mirror.

Put your money where your blog is

As far as I'm concerned, this $60 is already in my pocket.

NFL Picks: Conference Championships

Seriously, somebody shoot me. This week, I added some injury to the insult I post here on FCF by losing $55 betting among the games in Vegas. Thank goodness the Saints came through for me.

An update on my turnover theory, looking at last week's winners:

Jets (+1)
Colts (+3)
Vikings (+3)
Saints (+2)

For those of you scoring at home, the winners of the eight playoff games thus far are a combined +18 on turnovers, better than two per game. My theory has very good grounding - I just haven't correctly picked the identity of the club who would protect the ball better. In retrospect, I guess I should have anticipated Darrelle Revis catching that ridiculous pick off of the Charger WR's leg, Ed Reed making two interceptions in the span of six plays without the Ravens actually gaining possession, and Tony Romo eating a bucket of KFC pre-game. You'll be happy to learn that my remarkable luck in the desert extended to blackjack and roulette as well.

While I'm rehashing last week, I'd like to point out that, in a fair world, my check for $50 from Wade Phillips would be arriving in my Cleveland mailbox any day now. I know they got routed, but everything goes back to Phillips' decision to kick a field goal from the Minnesota 31 on 4th and 1. Why not just tell your team: I don't think you're good enough. I don't think you can win. Aside from the fact that it was strategically stupid (the 'Boys had been rushing very well and their kicker was a midseason add), it was an early sign to the Vikings that the Cowboys were afraid, and they played the whole rest of the game like it. Right before kickoff, I saw a shot of Wade Phillips' face, and immediately lamented having wagered on him. Never again. Update: the Cowboys renewed his contract? Did they not see that game? Wow.


Last week
Andy: 1-3
Figgs: 1-3
Nick: 3-1
Bucko: 2-2
Gopo: 1-3
Nick's Money Picks ($): 3-1

Playoffs so far
Andy: 1-7 (!)
Figgs: 2-6
Nick: 5-3
Bucko: 3-5
Gopo: 2-6
Nick's Money Picks ($): 5-2


AFC Championship

Sunday 3 pm
COLTS (-7) vs Jets
Andy: Or as it's more popularly known, The Battle of Teams That Cost Me $30 Each Last Weekend. At least Indy had the decency to knock out an archnemesis for me. I now see the ability of this Jet team (10th in Football Outsiders' DVOA ratings), but I dislike them personally, especially the villainous Braylon Edwards. What a jerk. And when you're 1-7 picking the playoffs through two rounds, you can freely pick the teams you want to win, regardless of whether you think they will. Colts. (And I think they will win the turnover battle and the game.)
Figgs: The Jets really surprised me last week, and should have convinced me that they are a quality team, but for some reason I'm still just not sold. Colts.
Nick: This line opened at 7.5 pretty much everywhere except The Mirage, and that half point is troublesome. But only giving 7, I like the Colts here. Everything has gone the Jets' way so far, from matchups, to turnovers, to Sanchez playing like a mediocre quarterback. I've waffled on the Jets' games the last two weeks and elected to go with them both times, but I'm hoping to time my departure from the bandwagon perfectly. Colts, possibly in a blowout. ($ -9)
Bucko: I'd really like to see the Colts in the Super Bowl again, but I actually think the Jets will at least keep it within 7. Peyton is the man, but they have no running game. I believe the Jets will once again run the ball well, and Revis will control Wayne. I'll be cheering for the Colts, but I think the Jets will take it.
Gopo: colts. i am 100% convinced that the jets are not a quality football team - they've gotten really lucky with some solid matchups against teams that go at their strength. they can't pass the ball at all, and they play defense by blitzing the hell out of the qb. that's not going to work against manning.


Sunday 6:40 pm
SAINTS (-4) vs Vikings
Andy: The Saints have been the most exciting team in the NFL this season - a delight to watch, a great home atmosphere, won me $54 last weekend, and featuring my favorite player in the league in Drew Brees. How can you not root for them in this game? I told Nick after they crushed Arizona that I was taking them in the NFC title game regardless of the line, and I'm sticking with that. Nick called me stupid, by the way, but I went to Carnegie Mellon, so that certainly can't be the case! Saints, all the way. And guess what, Nick? I'm taking them in the Super Bowl too.
Figgs: I really wish the Saints and Colts wouldn't have tanked it at the end of the season, cause a battle of the undefeateds would be so great. I still think the game will happen, just not with the perfect records. Nawlins.
Nick: I like the Saints here, too. The Vikings were 8-0 at home this season, and just 4-4 on the road. That should be enough to take the Saints in and of itself, but the Saints also throw effectively against big blitzes, and their secondary should be good enough to slow down the Vikes' passing attack. Also, it's going to be alot tougher for Favre to make calls at the line this week. Old dome=huge advantage. Saints. ($ -3.5)
Bucko: Guess what? I'm going with Brett Favre, Brett Favre, and Brett Favre.
Gopo: saints for sure. i've been waiting all season for favre to pull off one of his 3 int games, and i think this is it. i hope his arm falls off during one of the throws.

We have no Cavaliers coverage on Forest City Fanatics

Or so you thought! I'm here to help with my semi-periodic update on the city's highest-flying sporting organization. Well, until either the Cleveland Gladiators or my company's Corporate Challenge teams get rolling again.

I wrote about two months ago that fan excitement surrounding the Cavaliers was fairly low, surprising for a club of their merits. I chalked it up to Browns drama and the fact that the Cavalier season, quite frankly, doesn't start until April.

There was also much criticism of their play - problems with Shaq fitting in, losing focus in games against inferior opponents, inconsistency, and so on.

It's entirely possible much of that was overstated.

The Cavaliers are 32-11. They are on pace to win 61 games. They lead the Eastern Conference by three games over Boston, four on Atlanta, and five over some nonsense team from Central Florida. They have already finished both of their long Western swings, and will cross the Mississippi only once more this year, during a two-game road trip through New Orleans and San Antonio. They have 23 home games remaining versus just 16 roadies. Their remaining opponent win % is .483. They've been crushing good teams like the Lakers and Magic. They can play any style - fast, slow, big, small. They lead the league in opponent FG%. They've had almost no injury concerns this year - Jamario Moon's return next week brings them to full strength and Leon Powe's February return could bolster the roster further. Not to mention that they approach the trade deadline from a position of strength, flush with cash as clubs look to dump salary in the form of Troy Murphy, David West, and Antawn Jamison.

What's not to like? Go Cavs.

Club Trillion

Move over Evan Turner, Mark Titus is my new favorite college basketball player. Titus is a walk-on senior for Ohio St, and averages less than one minute per game. While he might not be on the All-American team, he does have the best blog in all of sports. "Club Trillion" makes fun of things ranging from opposing teams and fans, to himself for being a benchwarmer, but also offers a rare perspective on the team from someone who sees it all from the bench. If you don't want to read his posts, I at least recommend checking out the "Mr. Rainmaker" video. You can see that he really is a great shooter, and the random "sportsmanship" and "hustle" parts are hilarious.

NFL Picks: Divisional Round

Not a good Wild-Card weekend for the FCF team. We all missed on the Ravens' disgusting win and the Cardinals' shootout victory, and only Nick hit on Dallas' pummeling of Philly. I also managed to miss the Jets for a clean 0-4 weekend, making me 1-7 the past two years on the NFL's opening round.

I was struck last weekend by the extent to which turnovers decide NFL Playoff games. I know it's not groundbreaking analysis to suggest that turnovers are important in football, but the extent to which they matter cannot be overstated. Look at last week's winners and their turnover differentials for the game:

Jets (+2)
Dallas (+3)
Baltimore (+2)
Arizona (+2)

I mean, that's absolutely staggering. This week, I'm going to try to simply pick the team who will turn the ball over the fewest times, as that is apparently the only thing that affects NFL outcomes.

In related news, three of us will be in Las Vegas for the weekend - I know I'll be laying some dollars on each these games to make things a little more exciting while I'm out west. I may even add the amount I'm wagering on each game if I get a chance. I'm also planning to put a few dollars on the Cavs' upcoming NBA Title. Hey, you only live once.

Last week
Andy: 0-4
Figgs: 1-3
Nick: 2-2
Bucko: 1-3
Gopo: 1-3
Nick's Money Picks ($): 2-1


AFC Division Playoffs

Saturday 8:15 pm
COLTS (-7) vs Ravens
Andy: The Ravens just sicken me. What a gross organization. But that's why this is such an appealing bet for me. If I take Baltimore, I get 7 points, making three scenarios possible:
1) Ravens get blown out. I lose some loot, but hey, Ravens get blown out!
2) Ravens lose a close game. Not only is this a quite likely scenario, as Gopo describes, but it's best-case for me, as their stupid purple asses get knocked out and I collect at the window. Drinks on me!
3) Ravens win. At least I'll have my precious money to make things better.
So, I'm taking Baltimore.
Figgs: I like (the pick of) the Ravens a lot here. I think they could win it outright, but probably lose by a few. Either way, I don't see it as a touchdown game. I just want to make sure to clarify that I do not, never have, or will ever like the Baltimore Ravens, I just like the pick here. One more time, Ravens = suck.
Nick: Colts. I should mention up front that I've had the opposite in every game this week, but I've really gotten down on Joe Flacco as the week progressed. If Indy can get ahead early, they'll run away with it. The key to this game? Stop Baltimore's running game. If Indy does that, they'll win handily. You can throw on the Ravens, by the way. Also, they suck.
Bucko: I feel like this might be a closer game than people think. I'm still hoping Indy wins, but I'm going to take the Ravens in this one.
Gopo: i'm really trying to be objective and set aside my hate for the ratbirds. but man, i really hate them. hmmm. this is really going to mess with my rooting loyalties, but i'll go with the ravens. they played them close the first time around and i don't think it'll be different this time.

Sunday 4:40 pm
CHARGERS (-8) vs Jets
Andy: I haven't bought the Jets all year, and I still don't. The Chargers have won 11 straight games, are rested, are at home, and are just a better football team than New York. Remember my turnover-differential discussion in the open to this article? San Diago is +10 for the year while the Jets are -2, thanks to Mark Sanchez' 20 picks, most in the AFC. More than Derek Anderson and Brady Quinn combined! Yeah, the Jets can run the ball, but that doesn't win playoff games in warm weather. Bolts.
Figgs: While watching that Jets/Bengals game last week, I continued to think, "Wow, whoever wins this will get killed by Indy or SD." I just think that the Bolts are a far superior team. San-Di-ego, super Charrrgers.
Nick: Jets. I've flip-flopped on this one like three times, but I'm back to my original pick. Without looking past the surface, I'd totally go Bolts here. Rivers vs. Sanchez should be enough to pick San Diego, right? Here's the thing - the Chargers' weaknesses play right into the Jets' strengths. The Jets can run the ball well, and the Chargers can't stop it. The Chargers are an incredible passing team, and the Jets are incredible against the pass, featuring the best corner in the league. I don't know if the Jets can win this outright, so I'm going to take the points, unlike last week. But 7.5 is too many here, and I think the Jets can keep it within the margin. ($ +7.5)
Bucko: I actually think the Jets are a better team than most analysts think they are. This is just one point too high for me. I take the J-E-T-S, Jets, Jets, Jets!
Gopo: that line is high. i think the chargers will win, but not sure its by more than a td. i'll go with the jets for now.


NFC Wild-Card Playoffs

Sunday 4:30 pm
SAINTS (-7) vs Cards
Andy: Whoa, it's getting crowded there on the Cardinals' bandwagon! I'll be sticking with the Saints. Rested, home in front of an insane crowd, with a defense that forces turnovers and an offense that can score in bunches. Everyone forgot about them because they lost a tough one to Dallas and a couple of unimportant season-enders, but this is still an excellent team. And check out the TO margin: Saints (+14), Cardinals (-5). The top team in the playoffs vs the bottom. Huge. [Granted, this was also the case with +25 Green Bay a week ago, but I can't let one game override my percentages.] I'll buck the national feeling and lay those points to back the 'Aints.
Figgs: The NFC games are much tougher to pick in my mind. This is gonna be a shootout, which means a late score may be meaningless but flip the spread. I'm going with the Cards, just because I wouldn't be surprised if they made a run like last year.
Nick: Saints. This feels like a huge "fade the public" game, and Kurt Warner can't play like Dan Marino two weeks in a row. The Saints also feel like they're playing for the still-wounded city of New Orleans, and they have one of the few remaining home-field advantages in the SuperDome. This game is kind of a crap shoot, but I'm betting that the Cards have trouble slowing down the Saints, and the Cards can't move the ball as well as they did last week. Plus, I really want to root for the Saints balls-out in this one. This is my dumbest bet of the weekend.
Bucko: I'm so pissed that Green Bay is out. The face mask should have been called. I'm going with the Cards here. I actually think they'll make it to the NFC Championship.
Gopo: i think the saints get shocked by the cards. they haven't been playing very well down the stretch and arizona is coming off a great game.

Sunday 1 pm
VIKINGS (-3) vs Cowboys
Andy: I've been wanting to bet against Minny for a month, and now I get a Cowboy team that's rolling and getting three points with which to do so. Not a huge TO differential (Dal +1, Min +4), but Tony Romo's ball security (ha!) has been excellent - just 5 picks in his past 13 outings. I've been lukewarm on Dallas all season, but it's time for me to recognize that they're good. As long as Tony Romo remembers where Jared Allen is and Brett Favre remembers how much he enjoys throwing the ball to the other team, Dallas can pull this off. Cowboys.
Figgs: I have no idea here. Will Tony Romo 'Tony Romo' it or will Bret Favre 'Bret Favre' it. My bet is that Homo makes the more costly mistake. Vikes.
Nick: Boys. I'm terrified that I've now piggy-backed all of Bill Simmons' picks, but hey, he can't go 0-4 again next week, right? This is my favorite game on the board. The Cowboys look tough, and the Vikings have some key injuries that hurt their defense. The Dallas defense is so fast, and turf will only make them faster. They will pressure Favre without blitzing against a suspect Minnesota line. Plus, I feel for Tony Romo. Dude gets a bad rap. Romo's a good quarterback, and seems like a new enough fella. I don't hate the Cowboys like some people, as I'm indebted to them for beating the Steelers in the Super Bowl back in the '90s. Plus, I like the Cowboys' running game. (Dallas - straight up)
Bucko: Like Frank Caliendo as Madden all I can say is Brett Favre, Brett Favre, Brett Favre! He'll find a way to pull it out in a close game. I'll say it first here. I wouldn't be suprised if Favre is a Brown next year.
Gopo: cowboys. i actually think the cowboys win this one outright - they are just rolling at the right time.

Checks and Balances

Mike Holmgren's decision to retain Eric Mangini seems to have surprised just about everyone in the Cleveland Browns fraternity to some degree. We've certainly seen NFL coaches get sacked who had accomplished more than Mangini and who weren't lightning rods for controversy.

One of the most interesting things about Mangini is how the opinions of fans and media members see-sawed on him throughout the season. When the Browns sat at 1-11, you couldn't pay a Browns fan to back the beleaguered coach. Winning tends to cure most ills, and when Mangini's Browns reeled off four straight wins to close out the season, the landscape definitely changed.

When Mike Holmgren held his first press conference a few days before he announced the Mangini verdict, fan opinion seemed nearly split on whether Mangini should stay or go. At least in the last decade, we haven't seen the Cleveland fan base so polarized by one of the three teams' coaches. But what might be most interesting is not that Mangini is polarizing, but that the majority of his supporters and detractors tend to be fairly moderate. As opposed to say, Romeo Crennel, who had little or not support before he was fired, most folks who had their fingers on the pulse of the Cleveland Browns seemed to recognize Mangini's clear strengths and weaknesses, and simply believed that the bad outweighs the good, or vice-versa.

As for me, I was in the "fire Mangini" camp. While I believed (and still believe) that Mangini was a competent coach, I thought it would be too difficult for him to coexist with Mike Holmgren over the long haul. The two come from drastically different coaching backgrounds and as such, they have developed very different philosophies. Add in some of Mangini's questionable interactions with colleagues and the fact that Holmgren's arrival stripped him of total authority, and it seemed like the two would be on a collision course down the road. From Holmgren's perspective, it looked much safer to start from scratch.

But Holmgren saw things differently. After several lengthy meetings discussing philosophy and teamwork, Holmgren elected to keep Mangini. Apparently coaching schemes aren't as important to Holmgren as some of us believed, and he's more concerned with adding good people around him, regardless of X's and O's.

As I've mentioned before, I think Eric Mangini is a good coach. He's not Paul Brown, but he's a solid coach who got a raw deal last season in New York. (After more than a decade of Palmer/Davis/Crennel, "solid" would be a major upgrade.)

Mangini's Jets went 9-7 last season just like Rex Ryan's club this season, and they did so with inferior personnel and without the luxury of being gifted two wins to end the season. But a down year in the AFC allowed Ryan's Jets to sneak into the playoffs. Combine that with Rex Ryan's goofy "walking sound byte" demeanor, which runs in stark contrast to Mangini's reserved personality, and Rex Ryan has become a media darling while Mangini has been (sometimes fairly, and sometimes unfairly) vilified.

But back to Holmgren, there certainly were some external factors that played into his decision to keep Mangini. The lack of available alternatives, such as former Holmgren assistant Jon Gruden, was probably a factor. And even though Randy Lerner is playing with Monopoly money, I'm sure he wasn't wild about the possibility of paying three head coaches (Romeo Crennel's contract runs through 2011) for the next two seasons, especially with the specter of a lockout looming in 2011.

We've seen new management teams come in and tear organizations down to the bare bones. With Holmgren, who has stated that what made the Cleveland job so appealing was the total control he was granted and the fact that "no layers" existed between himself and Randy Lerner, it looked like a slam dunk that he would push the self-destruct button and build every facet of the organization in his image. But one enormous thing that retaining Eric Mangini indicates is that Holmgren is not only comfortable working with people who aren't necessarily "his guys," but he welcomes it.

One of the most difficult things to do in any sort of leadership position is to seek out dissenting opinions. We all like to believe that our way is the right way, and nobody relishes being told otherwise. But if you don't actively seek out different perspectives, you risk boxing yourself in creatively, and groupthink becomes a very real danger. With that in mind, it's encouraging that Mike Holmgren's first real decision as team president, retaining Mangini, will bring a very different voice and perspective to all major team decisions. Holmgren might not always take Mangini's advice, but it's important that debate will take place, and all of Holmgren's decisions won't simply be rubber stamped.

Let's shift the focus to Mangini, who certainly had his shortcomings in his first year with the Browns. In a process that made less sense than the last Matrix sequel, Eric Mangini essentially hired his own boss, former Browns general manager George Kokinis. It was clear from the beginning that Mangini had the power both on the field and in the front office. As a result, Mangini bears responsibility for some -- if not all -- of the personnel moves the Browns made in 2009.

Mangini's personnel record was truly a debacle. He received acceptable, but hardly great value for Kellen Winslow, he definitely sold low on Braylon Edwards, and his apparent aversion to star players was very unsettling. To run a winning football team, sometimes you have to tolerate a handful of eccentric personalities in order to build the most talented roster possible, and Mangini didn't seem to understand that.

Mangini had four draft picks in the first two rounds last year, and two of them (Robiskie, Veikune) didn't even dress for most games. Ray Charles was better at darts than Mangini was at drafting. The only saving grace of Mangini's draft was Alex Mack, who developed into a solid center by the end of the season.

Enter Mike Holmgren, who also didn't have a stellar draft record when he served as coach/GM of the Seahawks. In a strange twist of fate, the Browns hired a president who probably is sympathetic to the difficulty Eric Mangini faced in both constructing and coaching the Browns last season. Holmgren, who is a surefire Hall of Fame coach, probably understands better than anybody that even great coaches can't handle the enormous responsibility that comes with that dual role (with the one exception currently residing in the Boston area). With that in mind, Holmgren's experience almost certainly worked in Mangini's favor.

Once Mangini made it clear to Holmgren that he was comfortable staying in Cleveland even without control of personnel, Holmgren probably became pretty comfortable with Mangini. Holmgren knew that he's not a total authority on personnel either, especially on the defensive side of the ball, so he hired new general manager Tom Heckert to fill that role.

By adding Heckert to build the team, Holmgren has neutralized Eric Mangini's biggest weakness. Not only that, but by stripping Mangini of his personnel responsibilities Holmgren gave Mangini more time to focus on coaching the team, which puts him in a position to improve what was already his strength.

Since October, I've wanted to see Eric Mangini canned. I thought his weaknesses outweighed his strengths. But this new management structure will create clearly defined roles, and Eric Mangini's role will be that of the coach, not the general manager. There's a new sheriff in town, and it's the walrus, not the penguin. Mike Holmgren has made it clear that any kind of power play from Mangini will not be tolerated, and you can't sweet talk Holmgren like you can a certain phantom owner. If Mangini doesn't toe the line and stick to his specialty then he'll be terminated, and he's aware of that.

I'm still not sold on Mangini but I'm glad he's still the Browns' coach, which wasn't the case two weeks ago. While Mangini certainly has his faults, the checks and balances of this new managerial hierarchy should help him focus on what he does best: coaching (and only coaching).

It remains to be seen whether or not this new management team can help the Browns ascend out of the AFC North cellar, but the Browns' decision-makers are now credible football guys with proven track records, which is definitely a first for the post-1999 Browns. It has been 11 long, agonizing years, but the Browns might finally be back on track.