It is in times of perceived Cavaliers implosion that I usually write a "don't panic because the Cavs are in fact better than you realize" post. I am fully prepared to do just that right now, except that I did one, like, a week ago.

Briefly, however: Anonymous, our most loyal of readers, recently threw a wrench into the "Don't boo LeBron" machine with his sacrilegious LeBron-bashing. To him I will simply say that it is entirely possible for a team to have shortcomings (which the Cavs, like any team, do have) in addition to--or in spite of--certain glowing strengths. To say that LeBron must be doing something wrong because the Cavs have done something wrong (a proposition that, again, is being blown out of proportion) is to ignore the Cavs players who truly are doing something wrong. LeBron has played better this season than anyone in the NBA. What is He supposed to do, be the most efficient player in the NBA by a slightly greater margin?

I didn't sit down here today to praise LeBron, though. Believe it or not, I sat down here today to complain about something Cavs-related, that something being the acquisition of Flip Murray. The Mike Wilks-Flip Murray trade, from what I've seen and heard, has been universally praised by the traditional media. They think a guy like Flip Murray is what the Cavs needed, and I can understand why they think so. For one, there's the eyewitness factor: Murray looks like a good player because he's fast and can dunk and moves around a lot on defense. Secondly, traditional stats are generous to a guy like Murray. People see that he averages 10 points a game coming off the bench and are satisfied.

When he's not scoring one of those points, though, he's hurting his team in a multitude of ways. Peruse this summary of Murray's career statistics, and then let us count the ways:

           TS%    Usg    PER    ORtg   DRtg   PW%
'02-'03   .391   28.9    6.6     71    107   .007
'03-'04   .497   24.4   15.4     98    109   .187
'04-'05   .433   22.2    9.9     91    110   .066
'05-'06   .461   23.0   11.5    N/A    N/A    N/A    
career*   .477   23.9   13.6     96    110   .148
*not counting '05-'06

Firstly, Murray is quite an inefficient shooter. And it's not as if he's taking low-percentage shots; he's a guy who prefers to drive to the hoop. His career TS% of .477 is 31 points lower than--I kid you not--Ira Newble's career percentage. It's also 41 points lower than what Damon Jones is shooting this year and 48 points lower than what Sasha Pavlovic is shooting this year. And Flip's '05-'06 TS% is even lower than his career average.

Nextly, Murray's usage rate is through the roof. His career mark is higher than any Cavalier's is this season, except for LeBron. That means that Murray is using up an incommensurate percentage of his team's possessions. If he were an efficient scorer, that would be a good thing, but since he's not, it's a glaringly bad thing. Call Damon Jones a chucker if you want; at least his career usage rate (16.0) is lower than Murray's. And Damon's '05-'06 usage rate is even lower (12.3).

Moving on, Flip plays poor defense. His D-rating of 110 is higher (ie: worse) than Damon Jones' career 108 rating and Sasha Pavlovic's career 106 rating. Over the last three seasons, in fact, Murray had one of the highest D-ratings in the NBA among players with significant minutes. Combine that with a deplorable O-rating of 96 and you get a truly ugly Player Win Percentage of .148. In other words, a team that scores 96 points per hundred possessions and allows 110 points per hundred possessions (ie: a team of Ronald Murray-caliber players) will win about 14.8% of its games.

OK, so I think I've established what a bad player Murray is. Here's the tricky part: he's arguably better than Mike Wilks, for whom he was traded. If it were up to me, I would still prefer Wilks, whose career numbers are superior, but in '05-'06, Murray has actually been the better player. Besides, the Cavs' depth problem is probably direst at shooting guard, not point guard, so let's assume for the sake of argument that Murray is more valuable to the Cavs than Wilks was. That would mean that, in some sense, the Cavs "won" the trade with the Sonics.

This would all be well and good if Coach Brown were using Murray as he did Wilks--essentially, not at all. During the first 54 games of the season, Wilks played a total of 250 minutes, most of it in garbage time. Murray, however, has already played 100 minutes in just 3 games. He even started the Cavs' most recent game, playing 40 minutes. 40 minutes! Only LeBron played more in that game.

In other words, Murray is not replacing Wilks. He's replacing a bunch of minutes that used to go to Sasha Pavlovic and Damon Jones--both of whom are better options, as I've shown. We can only hope that this usage pattern doesn't continue. The Cavs may have a problem with guard depth, but so far they have only made the problem worse.

People, don't boo LeBron. If you must, boo

• Ira Newble
• Ronnie Duncan
• parking tickets
• Tim Couch
• racism
• your family

but I beg of you, don't boo LeBron. He is the best player in the NBA by any worthy standard; He is our savior and in Him we shall trust unconditionally.

Who's with me?

Now that member of the All-World Name Team Coco Crisp has left Cleveland, Indians fans must look elsewhere for their crazy name fix. Members of the current 25-man roster leave little hope, what with your Jason Michaels and Jason Johnsons. I'm looking for the Coco Crisps of the future. Of the current Indians minor leaguers, here are the brightest hopefuls:

• Alfred Ard - OF (R) Alfie, as I imagine everyone affectionately calls him, kind of sucks. In 2004, he was the Tribe's 30th round draft pick. The chances of him reaching the majors are slim to nil.
• Bear Bay - SP (AA) We may never know whether Bear is named after scenic Bear Bay Lodge in Alaska, but Indians beat reporters may have a chance to ask him themselves pretty soon. The Indians got Bay from the Cubs in exchange for Cliff Bartosh. Bay isn't a true "prospect," but would make for decent bullpen filler.
• Bubbie Buzachero - RP (AAA) Though Bubbie will never be a Bubbe, he stands a chance as more bullpen filler for the Indians. The Tribe acquired Bubbie from Toronto for Brian Tallet this off-season--yet more evidence of the aptitude of the Indians scouting department.
• Fausto Carmona - SP (AAA) For some, Carmona has long been a touted prospect. The initial weirdness of his name might have worn off for them. It's clear that Sr and Sra Carmona are Goethe-lovers. One must wonder whether he has a brother Werther.
• Rodney Choy Foo - SS (High A) While his name conjures up a black kung fu warrior with a humongous afro from the 70's, Rodney is actually Hawaiian. Barring an act of LeBron, Choy Foo stands no chance to be a future contributor for the Tribe.
• Boodle Clark - 3B (Short-season A) Imagine a .206/.307/.282 hitter in short-season A named John Clark. Would anybody ever notice? But change "John" to "Boodle," and what do you have? Only one of the most exciting prospects in funny name history.
• Cirilo Cumberbatch - OF (Short-season A) A Panamaniac, Cirilo has put up average or so numbers in his very short professional career. His greatest asset, besides his name, is age. Cirilo was only 19 last season.
• Doodle Hicks - SP (R) Ideally, Doodle would appear right after Boodle, but the alphabet is an uncaring maiden. I'm not totally sure Doodle actually exists, The Baseball Cube has no stats for him nor does he appear on Burlington's roster. The only evidence is that the Indians definitely drafted Doodle in the 28th round two seasons ago, and that the Burlington Indians ran a ridiculous "Boodle Doodle Noodle" promotion last season. If Doodle is real, he might be our best shot at replacing Coco.
• Juan Valdes - OF (Low A) Known mostly for his delicious Colombian coffee, Juan has slowly advanced through the lower rungs of the Indians organization. He is an unpromising player, at best, and looks to be somewhat of a bust considering the team selected him in the 5th round two years ago.
• Jonathan Van Every - OF (AA) Van Every is a Three True Outcomes king: in 2005, he walked 15%, homered 8%, and struck out 34% of his plate appearances. Unless he cuts down on strikeouts, Van Every likely won't be more than a September call-up.

Honorable mentions: Cody Bunkelman - SP (Low A), Kevin Kouzmanoff - 3B (High A), Nathan Panther - OF (AA)

Unfortunately, Bear and Fausto, who I believe have two of the weaker names, are the only two nominees with a real chance to have more than a cup of coffee. But don't fret too much, there's a chance your Boodle Clarks and Doodle Hicks of the world will make the leap. And don't forget that the Indians scouting department in the past few seasons has been responsible for trading for guys like Milton Bradley, Coco Crisp, and just recently Bubbie Buzachero. There is always hope.

At this time last year, the Cavaliers were 31-21, just as they are right now. 31-21, of course, was the shining pinnacle of the '04-'05 campaign, as the Cavs then went 11-19, just barely missing the playoffs. This we all remember.

Using advanced 21st-century technology, Alex was actually able to pinpoint the exact moment when the season turned sour (8:11 left in the 2nd quarter of a game at Indiana). Alex compiled what was essentially a season-long Game-O-Graph using the Cavs' point differential. Here, for your enlightenment, is that graph, with the current season superimposed on it (in blue):



The similarities are overwhelming! Clearly, the '05-'06 Cavaliers are about to collapse, as is their destiny.

The thing is, though, that last year's Cavs had a lot going against them at this point in the season. When their decline began, they were already in over their heads; they were unlucky; circumstances conspired to make their decline look worse than it really was. So let us investigate--do (or will) this year's Cavaliers suffer from any of these misfortunes?

I don't know of any NBA stat outlets that track defense-adjusted statistics, but if such statistics had been available to us last February, they would have revealed the Cavs to be rather worse than their regular or Pythagorean won-lost record showed. I would have been warning you all about a possible regression over the final 30 games. Observe:

                         '04-'05  '05-'06
opp. W%, first 52 games    .464     .498
opp. W%, last 30 games     .524     .489

This season, the Cavs' schedule is much more even. For what it's worth, the next 30 games will actually be played against slightly weaker competition than the first 52.

As to the matter of luck, the current Cavaliers, at .596, are slightly underperforming their Pythagorean win percentage of .609. That means, at the very least, against equal competition, we could reasonably expect them to maintain (or improve) their percentage of wins.

Now, I know what you're thinking. Larry Hughes played in 28 of the first 52 games, and he will almost certainly not play in any of the remaining 30. Of course, I was slightly critical of Hughes early in the season, because honestly, he wasn't playing nearly as well as he was getting credit for, but with the Cavs' horrible guard depth, his absence truly has hurt the team. Here's how they've done with and without him:

            Hughes   no Hughes
W-L          18-10     13-11
Win%         .643      .542
Pyth W-L     19-9      13-11
Pyth. Win%   .663      .539

Okay, so let's assume the Hughes-less Cavs continue to play at a .539 clip. They would go approximately 16-14 from now until the end of the regular season. Their final record would be 47-35. Over the last 10 seasons in the Eastern Conference, that record would have been good enough for an average playoff seed of #4.9--and in each of the last two seasons, it would have been good enough for the #3 seed.

At the very least, we have every reason to believe the blue line on that Game-O-Graph above will go up between now and April 19. We have absolutely no reason to think it will go down. If it does, it will be because something major changes, not because the Cavs are the victims of circumstance, as was the case a year ago.

Who is enjoying the better season between these two Eastern Conference centers?

                    TS%   REB-r  USG-r    PER
Z. Ilgauskas, CLE   59.7   14.7   21.8   22.6
B. Wallace, DET     49.9   20.3   10.9   18.5

The answer is probably Zydrunas. With Wallace, you have great defense but no offense. With Z, you have great offense and at least some defense. How insignificant is Ben Wallace's offensive game? His True Shooting Percentage ranks him 161st among qualifying NBA players, dead last among Eastern Conference centers, and third-worst among NBA centers (ahead of only DeSagana Diop and Lorenzen Wright). Luckily for the Pistons, Wallace's usage rate is so low (192nd out of 204 qualifying players) that he doesn't get many chances to bring down their offense. Z, for a point of comparison, has the eighth-best True Shooting Percentage in the NBA, and the absolute best among NBA centers.

But the Pistons have the best record we've seen in a bunch of years! Therefore, they must be represented at the All-Star Game by tons and tons of players, right? It's just that the success of the Pistons is due, in large part, to great depth in the absence of true stars. The success of the Cavs is due to the presence of a few stars in the absence of great depth. If we're going to have a game that features only stars (and we are), then we have to be willing to admit that stars alone do not always lead to the best won-lost record (and thus, having the best won-lost record does not necessarily mean you have the most stars).

I know this is going to sound like blasphemy to some idiots--er, members of the media--but let me pose another one. Which four are enjoying the better seasons from among these Eastern Conference forwards?

                    TS%   REB-r  USG-r    PER
C. Bosh, TOR        58.6   14.8   22.9   24.0
P. Pierce, BOS      58.2   11.2   26.9   23.9
V. Carter, NJN      54.8    9.7   28.5   22.9
D. Gooden, CLE      56.7   18.5   16.1   19.5
D. Howard, ORL      55.3   20.7   18.5   19.1
R. Jefferson, NJN   60.3   10.7   20.3   19.0
R. Wallace, DET     53.4   11.0   19.0   18.3

The answer must include Bosh, Pierce, and Carter. After that, there's room for debate, I'll admit. At the very least, Drew Gooden needs to be in the discussion (which he has never been, anywhere or at any time). Furthermore, Rasheed Wallace should not be an All-Star by any stretch of the imagination. If it were up to me, Gooden would be in, and that's based purely on objective considerations (ie: stats).

As you may remember, Corey checked in last week with his first impressions of the Coco Crisp trade. While Corey spread his focus on all parties involved (Crisp, Riske, Bard, Mota, Shoppach, and Marte), I will focus primarily on the two headliners: Coco Crisp and Andy Marte. Let's start the comparisons.

The first thing you notice when comparing the two is the age-gap. Crisp will be 26 this season, and Marte only 22. Score one for Marte. Secondly, for the Indians, third base is a much greater need not just now but in the future too than outfield. The Tribe's third basemen in the pipelines are Kevin Kouzmanoff, and that's about it. Unfortunately, the Kouz suffered a serious back injury last season and is still feeling the effects. Given that Aaron "Worst 3B in the AL" Boone is still the starter, something had to be done. On the flip side, the Indians have promising outfield prospects abound. From ready-for-the-majors fringe prospects like Jason Dubois, to actual prospects Franklin "Frankline" Gutierrez, Brad Snyder, to maybe-if-we-pray-we'll-get-lucky prospects like Ryan Goleski, there are competent players ready to man the outfield (not to mention Jason Michaels, although I guess I just did). Score another one for Marte.

In the sabermetric world, as news circulated about the possible trade, it was in vogue to downplay Coco Crisp's achievements as "batting-average driven" and overrated. True, he has a high batting average--but not artificially so. He had 62 extra-base hits last year, 19th in the AL. His 2005 walk rate of .045 is passable but still under the "magic number" of .050. Nevertheless, I am hesitant to label Coco as overrated and ready for a decline.

Baseball Prospectus's Player Empirical Comparison and Optimization Test
Algorithm, in fact, agrees with me--projecting Coco to be 5-win player for the next two seasons, eventually falling to 3.5 by 2010. Ironically, PECOTA sees the opposite route for Marte. This year we can reasonably expect Marte to be a 3.5-win player and trending upwards through 2010. In the following chart are the projected WARPs for both players through the next six seasons (Crisp is red and Marte is blue):



Basically, Coco Crisp is very good and will be only regular good in a few years; Andy Marte is regular good now and will be really good in a few years. Because I can't resist making graphs, I've also graphed PECOTA's projected EqAs for both players. But because PECOTA makes a series of projections for every player, both Crisp (red) and Marte (blue) have three lines. The top-most, the 75th-percentile projection, is an optimistic view on the player's ceiling. The middle line, the weighted mean, is the most reasonable expectation fans should have. The bottom is the 25th-percentile, a fairly pessimistic look on their careers.



Considering Marte's age, it's not surprising how much his projections vary. But even at the pessimistic level, he'll still be an alright third baseman. At his worst, Coco would be average for a few seasons and falter. At his best, Coco would be a fringe all-star outfielder for a few seasons. At his worst, Marte would be an average third baseman. At his best, Marte would be one of the best players in Major League Baseball. I can see someone choosing either play depending on whether they prefer a sure thing or a high-stakes risk (although it's not that much of a risk). All else equal, considering solely production on the field, I prefer Marte.

Figuring out baseball contracts is next to impossible, but I'm certain Marte is cheaper and will continue to be cheaper for a good while. Crisp will become a free agent after 2009 and receive a hefty raise for diminishing returns. Marte won't be a free agent until about 3000. I really don't know. But anyways, the contract-situation comes up in favor of Marte, yet again.

In the long-term, all signs unequivocally point to Marte being the better player. He'll be a better hitter, which is especially valuable considering a 3B on average hits worse than a CF--meaning a 3B with the same batting line as a CF is actually more valuable. He'll be cheaper and more likely to stay in Cleveland for longer. Plus, Marte would fill an obvious hole for the Indians in the extremely near future (I'm thinking May 2006) while the Indians have other outfielders. The areas in which Coco holds an edge are (1) cool name, and (2) defense. PECOTA predicts Crisp to be worth, on average, less than a tenth of a win more valuable than Marte on defense per season.

Of course your Sheldon Ockers and Joey Moronas will disagree, but this trade represents a significant upgrade for the Indians. Mark Shapiro made another shrewd move, managing to both improve the club both for right now and the future. I want Marte to start the season as the starting third baseman, but I understand the team's reluctance to do so. If Aaron Boone pulls another 2005 on us, well the future is now (or well, then). And yes, I realize that was unbelievably corny.

And finally, Andy unfortunately does not look very much like Ted Danson:



How this affects his future with the Indians remains to be seen.

Somehow the news that Dajuan Wagner had his colon removed two weeks ago flew under the radar. Dajuan missed 35 games in his rookie year for various injuries, including a bladder infection. The next season, he missed 38 games due to an inflamed pancreas and liver--both delaying required knee surgery. Last season, Wagner missed 71 games due to colitis. Colitis, people! What is wrong with this guy?

Well, I have the answer: Dajuan Wagner is cursed. He must be. Maybe it was running up the score in a 90-point blowout win by scoring 100 points his senior year of high school. Maybe it was the bad fish. We'll never know.

What we do know is that Dajuan Wagner will be back, by golly, colon or no colon. As long as he doesn't somehow contract SARS during his recovery, it won't be very long now until we see "The Messiah" suiting up. If Wagner can only manage to regain half of his career numbers (which would be half of 9.9 PER and .099 PW%), he would still be better than the current Ira Newble. May his ingrown nose hair grow forever and ever.