For the third consecutive year, I present the first edition of the closest thing to a Cavaliers season preview you'll see in the Mistake by the Lake Sporting Times. "Are They Improved?" historically has come in three installments: the starting lineup, the bench, and whatever else I feel like saying. And, since living dangerously is my wont, I'm publishing this first installment so close to the season opener that it only really holds for another 24 hours.

In the end, the key is answering the titular question. Is the net change from the Cavaliers we last saw in the 2007 N.B.A. Finals to the Cavaliers that will take the court on Wednesday positive or negative? Let's get started. [In "Are They Improved?" I use a good deal of advanced basketball statistics. If you have questions about what they mean, check out this introductory glossary.]

• When Sasha Pavlovic replaced Eric Snow in the starting lineup last February, Larry Hughes became the Cavaliers' point guard de facto. And since that change coincided with the team winning more often and ultimately reaching the Finals, the team doesn't see a reason to mess with a good thing. Though I believe it would behoove them to just flip the positions of Hughes and Daniel Gibson and letting Gibson shoulder the main ball-handling responsibilities, I'll leave that for the coaches to decide.
  
  So, setting aside my problem with Larry Hughes's offensive style, can the Cavaliers expect better production from Hughes in 2007-2008 than they received in 2006-2007? Surprisingly enough, I'd say so, although I'm basing that entirely on the Plexiglas Principle (otherwise known as regression to the mean). Hughes's performance was well below his career averages last season. And he's only 28 years old, so it'd be silly to attribute the drop to age. All else equal, he should be better than what we saw a year ago.
  
  That said, I wouldn't get my hopes up too much. Hughes's previously-mentioned career averages are below league average anyway and they include his incredible fluke of a contract year. Improved? Probably. Worth $12 million? Not yet.
  
  
• Daniel Gibson proved himself in the playoffs last spring and I don't need to get into all that. So, when Sasha Pavlovic's contract negotiations were still up the air, the team effectively announced Gibson as their starting shooting guard. But since Pavlovic re-signed about 10 minutes ago, the issue is muddied. On one hand, Gibson has been with the team all summer and should be better able to run Mike Brown's "new" offense. On the other, minutes follow money and only Pavlovic just signed a multi-million contract.
  
  If Pavlovic starts, it's reasonable to expect mild improvement. He's still young even though he's beginning his fifth season now—he'll turn 24 in two weeks. Amazingly, despite all the press he garnered last year, Pavlovic's numbers weren't spectacular or anything (12.2 PER, 55.3 TS%, .506 PW%). If Gibson starts, things get more volatile. Gibson, like Pavlovic, had O.K. regular season stats (9.5 PER, 55.6 TS%, .607 PW%). It's impossible to know whether Gibson will improve enough in one off-season to surpass Pavlovic. Gibson is only 21 himself.
  
  Pavlovic took three seasons to be a regular contributor while Gibson took zero. Does that mean that Gibson's career arc has a higher slope? I don't know. Fortunately, now that both players are in tow with the team, Mike Brown can tinker with lineups for the first half of the season and see what works. Chances are that one of the two will play better than Sasha did last year. Likely not by much, but I don't expect shooting guard to be a position of collapse this season.
  
  
• I am a witness.
  
  
• Similar to Pavlovic, Drew Gooden is surprisingly young (26 years old) for someone entering his sixth professional season. That definitely ups his chances of improving, if I know anything about age curves, basketball performance, and their relationship. But reasonable minds would tell us to expect the same Gooden we've seen since 2004. He's still a great rebounder—offensive and defensive—and he's improved his jump shot recently, but he still delivers approximately the same value to the team when he's on the floor. Is it just me, or does Gooden have the makings of a Juwan Howard—never a true star, but consistently productive well into his decline years? Don't forget though that I've spent only six minutes looking into this. Anyway, let's call this a push.
  
  
• Before I answer whether Zydrunas Ilgauskas has improved as a basketball player, I want to address something. It's clear to all that IIlgauskas has already worsened. Who the hell is that tall, gangly, bald-headed white guy? He looks like a stiff. Oh wait, it's Ilgauskas. Guys like him really shouldn't shave their heads; he's too tall for it. While Z has been balding for years now, can't he do it with dignity? Corey offered this advice: "He needs to go with the manly woodsman look. Or the filthy euro."
  
  Moving along… with each passing season, we draw closer and closer to the time when Z will suddenly suck. It happens to a lot of second-tier centers. For the time being, Z is asked to do less each season, instead concentrating on offensive rebounding and shot blocking. I don't think this'll be the magic year for Ilgauskas, but his skills are being slowly sapped by time. Injuries are another concern, though not for the reason you think. His feet will never be 100% again, but they haven't acted up in so long as to not be a major worry. Rather, one should worry just because old players get injured. It's a fact of life. To sum up, Z: still productive, but on the decline.

Tallying it up, that's two positions with mild improvement, one with mild decline, one push, and one blessed by a higher power. Regardless of this seeming optimism, it's reasonable to expect the 2007-2008 Cavaliers not to live up their forebears. Why? Firstly, and more importantly, because analysis of last year's squad is colored by their success in the post-season. The 2006-2007 Cavaliers benefitted from a weak Eastern Conference and took advantage of it. Secondly, pending the outcome of Anderson Varejão's contract, the bench could be anti-improved. That'll have to wait for another day. But today, at least according to me, some moderate optimism is warranted. Though you can expect one of Corey's patented "Why the Cavaliers Aren't As Bad As Everyone Says" posts once the season starts.

The Browns' DVOA, as of today: 0.0%—a new franchise record!

There's a reason the Rams are 0-8. They haven't had their bye week yet, otherwise they'd be 0-7. Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week.

Seriously though, the Browns didn't demolish the Rams like we had hoped, but played, I don't know, decently enough. The offense was strong passing all afternoon and the run game got going once the pass was established (Irony! Irony!).

The defense still has its problems. To my untrained eye, the front seven weren't able to get regular pressure on Marc Bulger or Gus Frerotte until late in the game. But by then, they used some creative blitzes to get to the quarterback and things got better. People's A, the Rams adjusted yards per attempt by quarter (excluding spikes): 11.6, 8.1, 5.8, 4.6

So, things got better as the game wore on. I don't know what that says about Romeo Crennel's pre-game inspirational speeching techniques, if anything at all. My money's on "nothing." Anyway, it's a mildly satisfying win and we can all bask in the warm glow of being above .500 and not think about those other, Cleveland non-football-playing teams that have sucked so badly in recent weeks.

Play of the Week

Alex says: Braylon Edwards had a game filled with highlights. Though my Play of the Week wasn't his longest gain or even a touchdown. On the opening drive of the third quarter, Edwards was fighting his way up the right sideline when Derek Anderson uncorked a pass way behind him. Edwards somehow did a horizontal 180 in mid-air and brought in the ball cleanly. He is so athletic and has such amazing body control that he made the catch look effortless. As if the play was drawn up that way and Anderson was supposed to throw behind his receivers by three yards. In terms of skill of technician, that's the best catch of the season.

Corey says: The offense produced a ton of great plays, including just about every catch Braylon Edwards made. If I have to choose just one, it might be Braylon's second catch of the afternoon, a 29-yarder that St. Louis challenged (claiming Braylon didn't get both feet down in bounds) but was upheld. Braylon somehow came away with that ball despite extremely tight coverage from Fakhir Brown, plus he just barely got his feet in bounds. It was the Browns' longest play of the game. Beautiful.

Player of the Week

Alex says: Edwards had his share of spectacular catches, like my selection for Play of the Week, but also a couple of bonehead plays, an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty for removing his helmet and a drop on 3rd-and-2 that would've iced the game. I don't want to pile onto Braylon for these memorable mistakes during an otherwise great game, so I'll move on. My Player of the Week is Derek Anderson who seemed to really put it all together against the Rams. He put touch on his long throws and avoided stupid mistakes. The numbers bear this out, as his 11.1 adjusted yards per attempt far surpass the league average of 5.97.

Corey says: Anderson had another great game, but I was even more impressed by Braylon Edwards. The guy has got to be considered one of the top receivers in the entire NFL right now. I think a lot of people were down on him coming into this season. But it's easy to forget that he spent his whole rookie year injured, and that he had Charlie Frye throwing him the ball all last year. That's a recipe to make any 2nd-year receiver look like a disappointment.

Quote of the Week

Alex says:

"The team that we are now is that we understand that things happen. How do you respond in the face of adversity? That's what this whole team has been about this whole season.... There's been situations and instances where we could've resolved back to last year or the year before that. But we understand those things are going to happen. So we want to respond to them. We want to understand that they happen, but what did we do about them when they happened?" —Braylon Edwards

Let me get this straight. The Browns are that they understand that things happen? If the team has to be something other than a team, being "that they understand that things happen" isn't a bad choice. But maybe the Browns haven't fully transformed from a football team to a concept yet, because they "want to understand that they happen." I guess the change isn't complete. To summarize: "we understand that things happen… we understand those things are going to happen… We want to understand that they happen."

Corey says:

"WHOOPS: When the replay review confirmed the call on the field, that Edwards had indeed caught a 29-yard pass from Anderson late in the first quarter, the Browns wide receiver thrust his arm in celebration. But in doing so, he knocked his mouth guard, which he had tucked into the face mask of his helmet, about 10 yards backwards." —Steve King of clevelandbrowns.com

Okay, so this isn't really a quote; it's an excerpt from a news story on the Browns' official site. But it made me laugh. This is the second-biggest piece of news from the game? Surely, Steve Heiden forgetting to take his multi-vitamin before the game deserves equal billing with this Scoop of the Century! (Don't worry, if I hear of any new developments on BraylonMouthGuardGate, I will let you know ASAP!)

Ryan Pontbriand Honorary Special Teams Moment of the Week

Alex says: Phil Dawson looked decidedly Borg this week. He was perfect on two field goals (a 35- and a 45-yarder) and three extra points. He also averaged 69 yards on his six kickoffs. On the season, that puts Phil at 9/10 on field goals and with the highest kickoff average of any season of his career (63.6). However, kickoff distances trend downwards with temperature. So we're sure to see that number drop as the weeks go on. Nevertheless, it's nice to see Phil (human, robot, or otherwise) return to form after a 2006 so disappointing, that I even hinted at replacing him. I'm sorry, Phil!

Corey says: The special teams had a good game, even though the kickoff return team was quiet. I was most impressed by the kickoff team, who stuffed every single Rams return attempt somewhere near the 20-yard line. The best of the bunch came in the fourth quarter, when Jason Gomillion Wright stuffed Brandon Williams at the 19-yard line, holding him to a 15-yard return.

Barry Redden Memorial Obscure Brown of the Week

Alex says: Darnell Dinkins, kickoff returning machine! For the fifth time in two seasons as a Brown, "Mayor" Dinkins returned a kickoff this week. Now his career return average is a respectable 14.8 yards. This probably should be an entry in the R.P.H.S.T.M.O.T.W., but I wanted to give you, the reader, a Phil Dawson update. So there you go.

Corey says: The newest Obscure Brown is Nick Sorenson, a seven-year veteran signed last Monday to fill Gary Baxter's roster spot. The most important thing you should know about Sorenson is this: he is a white defensive back—easily one of the top 20 white defensive backs in the NFL! Also, he has played in a Super Bowl (as a rookie in 2001), so he is almost certainly the final missing ingredient the Browns needed to make it to the playoffs!

Fashion Item of the Week

Alex says: We've touched on the new captain's patches being worn around the N.F.L. before, but just this week did I work up the nerve to actually research the four stupid little stars under the ugly block C. It turns out that for each season a player serves as a captain, they get a gold star. So, currently, since this patch is new to the entire league, every captain only has one gold star. Imposing captain's patches is dumb, but adding gold stars (what is this, first grade?) is even dumber. And why cap them at four? Do we not expect players to stick or be captain-y for more than four consecutive seasons? Am I supposed to notice/like a player more just because he's a captain? And is it just me, or has Hank Fraley's Q Score shot through the roof since September?

Corey says: This is usually the week when the Bengals, Bears, Broncos, Dolphins and (formerly) Browns don their scary orange Halloween uniforms (spoooooooky...). Anyway, the Bears took the plunge, but the Bengals somehow resisted the urge, going with their nearly-as-hideous black jerseys. The Dolphins were shipped overseas in an attempt to spare us the horror. The Broncos play Monday night. As always, I don't have a point. But my point is this: the Browns may be retarded when it comes to socks, but they very wisely scrapped the orange uniforms a few years ago, bucking the trend of NFL (and, while we're at it, NBA) teams obsessed with alternate unis and alternate uni merchandise sales.

Idiot of the Week

Alex says: I have to go with whoever redesigned the Rams uniforms after 1999. I'm sure the design firm charged a hefty amount just to change yellow to gold. And the after effect? The Rams go from upbeat, fun, and exciting to just plain dreary. All that shiny gold makes them look like a cheap imitation of a pimp.

Corey says: Who got Kellen Winslow Sr. his tickets? I thought this game wasn't even sold out. (Speaking of which, shame on you, St. Louis residents.) Winslow Sr. wasn't just seated in the upper deck, he was seated in one of the worst seats in the entire stadium! (Speaking of which, big props to CBS' cameraman for being able to even find the guy!) It seems to me the Winslow family needs to get a new ticket broker. Anyway, my Idiot of the Week is Ray Lewis.

Number of the Week

Alex says: 102, or the yardage lost by the Browns/gained by the Rams thanks to the Browns' 14 penalties. All else equal, a rational coach would choose for his team to go unpenalized every game. It's better to just not get flagged. Those 14 penalties are a season high, but I wonder how much did that actually hurt the team? In the article "False Starts: Separating Fact from Fiction" from Pro Football Prospectus 2007, Bill Barnwell and Aaron Schatz wrote:

During [the past five seasons], the overall correlation between losses and penalties was .21. Not all penalties are created equal, however. Penalties on defense or special teams have a negligible effect on wins and losses.... Defensive penalties are often a byproduct of good defensive play.

Keeping in mind that only offensive penalties serve as a mark of a losing team, the slate isn't exactly wiped clean. The offense was flagged seven times (all in two drives) for 55 yards. Four of these penalties were of the costliest variety, at least in regards to correlation with losing: false start. But there are mitigating circumstances. The Browns were on the road and road teams generally commit 55% of false starts and also that there have been historically many more false starts in domes like the Rams' than a real stadium. I wouldn't worry about the penalties at all if I were you, unless the team starts making this a habit.

Corey says: The Browns offensive line continues to cement itself as a top unit. Heading into Week 8, they ranked 10th in Adjusted Line Yards, but it has really been the left side of the line that's dominated:

               ALY  rank
left end      6.27    1
left tackle   4.61   10
mid/guard     4.46   11
right tackle  3.61   25
right end     3.71   18

Mind you, these numbers are likely to improve slightly following yesterday's win. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: the lefter, the better. The Browns are #1 in the NFL at running the ball outside to the left, for crying out loud. Joe Thomas is amazing. Long may he reign!

This Week on Josh's Cribbs

Corey says: On the seventh installment of FSN's hit reality show, we are presented with four vignettes from Josh's daily life. First, Josh and his wife visit 107.9 FM to record a promo for some kind of huge party they are sponsoring (possibly this). Next, Josh and teammate Shaun Smith volunteer in some kind of charity thing where they have to build a piece of playground equipment. The thing comes with a set of instructions, but Josh and Shaun don't have the patience to read them. Hilarity ensues. Later, Josh visits a sporting goods store at Tower City to sign autographs. And finally, Josh and his buddy Braylon Edwards sit courtside at the Cavaliers' preseason game against the Pistons (on October 11). Braylon, being from Detroit, is apparently tight with all the Pistons players. Josh, possibly at the suggestion of the Josh's Cribbs producers, attends the game completely decked out in Indians gear (LeBron having worn a Yankees hat only a week earlier). I'm all for Browns players wearing Indians gear at Cavs games, but people: LeBron is our Lord and Savior. He can wear whatever hat He so desires, whether it be Yankees, Schmankees, or Dippity Doodle.

Pythagorean Moral Standings

A week of moral rest really paid off for the Browns this week, as they racked up the moral points against the unchaste Rams. Around the division, the Steelers and Bengals battled each other to a moral stalemate and the Ravens made a mess in their moral pants (literally!) despite having a bye. How they did that, we may never know.

            PMW   PML   pct
Cleveland   5.9   1.1  .843
Pittsburgh  3.5   3.5  .500
Cincinnati  3.3   3.7  .471
Baltimore   0.0   8.0  .000

Next week: The Seahawks and Browns write a new chapter in their book The World's Most One-Sided Rivalry (Because the Browns Always Win) as the Browns (as always) win. We'll be here to provide a dust jacket quote on the next literary edition of Born and Raised on the Cleveland Browns!

Round off those corners, and buy a set of tires—it's time for more Browns football! Let's preview the snot out of this game!

First, you know the drill: DVOA reports. How DVOA works. Okey doke?

Browns offense vs. Rams defense:

           CLE offense  STL defense
total DVOA     3.7%         7.4%
passing       12.1%        17.2%
rushing       -6.1%        -1.2%

Hey, the Browns offense rates pretty decently! DVOA only goes back to 1996, but for the record, the Browns have never finished a season ranked higher than 25th in offensive DVOA. Right now they rank 14th. And the passing game is leading the way, ranking 12th in the NFL. Derek Anderson, Braylon Edwards, and Kellen Winslow each rank in the top 7 in DPAR at their respective positions, and in the top 12 in DVOA. I couldn't be more pleasantly surprised.

The Rams defense is pretty much all the Rams have going for them, and even then, it ranks 21st in the NFL in DVOA. They stop the run okay, but struggle to defend the pass, ranking 26th. This should make the Browns happy. While the Rams have done a decent job covering tight ends, slot receivers, and #1 receivers, they have been awful at stopping #2 receivers (62.3% DVOA, to rank 31st), suggesting they may have a weak corner the Browns can pick on (Fakhir Brown, maybe). The key for the Browns will be to pass the ball a lot, at least until they've built up a lead. Advantage: Browns

Rams offense vs. Browns defense:

           STL offense  CLE defense
total DVOA   -27.2%        15.8%
passing      -34.4%        26.9%
rushing      -16.9%         3.4%

The Browns rank 30th in defensive DVOA, ahead of only the Dolphins and Jets. The pass defense is leading the plunge, of course, ranking 29th in the league. Now, whether the culprits are the front seven, with their inability to pressure the quarterback, or the secondary, with their inability to cover receivers, is open to debate. Certainly, neither is blameless.

Luckily, the Rams offense is really, really terrible, especially when passing the ball. It seems they have been plagued by a weak offensive line (I wonder what that's like...), allowing a sack on 8.6% of passing plays (to rank 24th in the NFL). Among the receiving targets, Torry Holt, Isaac Bruce, and tight end Randy McMichael have been decent, but there's a huge drop-off after that. Quarterback Marc Bulger has put up some ugly numbers in 7 games so far: -10.1 passing DPAR (to rank 37th out of 42) and a -25.8% passing DVOA (also to rank 37th). The only QBs who have been worse: Gus Frerotte (Bulger's own backup), Tarvaris Jackson, Rex Grossman, Josh McCown, and Trent Dilfer. Advantage: Browns

Special teams matchups:

                        Browns     Rams
total DVOA                7.0%     -4.3%
FG kicking                1.4      -8.2
CLE kickoff vs. STL KR    1.1       1.1
CLE KR vs. STL kickoff   13.0      -7.6
CLE punt vs. STL PR       0.3       4.4
CLE PR vs. STL punt      -0.2      -0.6

The Browns special teams have been treading water for a few weeks, though they still rank 4th in the NFL in DVOA. The kickoff return team is still shouldering the bulk of the load, ranking 3rd (behind the Jets and Patriots). The St. Louis special teams rank 26th overall, lowlighted by the 4th-worst kickoff unit in the league. Granted, we may not get to see Josh Cribbs in the endzone, for the simple reason that the Rams may not kick off more than once or twice all day (especially considering they've had the 2nd-worst field goal kicking in all the land). Advantage: Browns

I'm not saying the Rams can't beat the Browns, but they're going to need a lot of things to go right for them. St. Louis ranks 31st in overall DVOA; the Browns rank 18th and are on the rise. Enjoy the game, everyone!

The Browns may be home re-alphabetizing their Hemingway first editions, but there's no off-week for Alex and me! You see, the bye week gives us a perfect opportunity to catch up on answering some of the thousands of reader e-mails we receive. There's just not enough time in a normal week, what with Alex's 13 jobs, my frequent business travel in Eastern Europe, taking care of Gomer (our secret black sheep younger brother), karate practice, and meticulously surveying the Cuyahoga River watershed.

So, just as we did during the Browns' 2006 bye week, the NBA All-Star break, and the MLB All-Star break, we're emptyin' out the ol' mailbox. Enjoy:

Dear Rubin Brothers,

Do you think this Chudzinski guy is for real? I think he is a poopyhead.

Maurice C.
Glendale, AZ

Corey says: You're entitled to your opinion, Maurice, but I believe that it's a little early to pass judgment. If you're holding a gun to my head, though, I'd have to say that the early-season performance of the Browns' offense has been very, very good. Waaaaay better than last year. Heading into the bye week, they ranked 12th in the NFL with a 5.4% DVOA. The running game has been okay, ranking 18th in the league, but the much-more-important passing game has exceeded our best expectations (15.5% DVOA, to rank 10th). And who knows how much those numbers are still being weighed down by Charlie Frye's all-but-forgotten "two quarters of suck".

Now, how much of the improvement is attributable to Chudzinski is debatable. There are those who will attribute the improvement to Derek Anderson (who has looked better of late, though I'm still not completely sold). I would much rather attribute the improvement to the upgraded offensive line; that is: team MVP frontrunners Joe Thomas and Eric Steinbach. In truth, it's probably a combination of Chudzinski, the linemen, and replacing Charlie Frye with someone decent.

The best thing I can say for Chudzinski is that the Browns now pass the ball. And—would you believe it?—they score lots of points. This is how it works in today's NFL, Maurice. Thanks for writing!

Dear Mistake Sports by the Lake Sporting Sports,

Where do you get your information for the weekly Moral Standings? Is there a website somewhere that posts moral results from NFL games?

T. Atkins
Rhinelander, WI

Alex says: Most writers dealing with moral matters, like The Ethicist at the New York Times Magazine, have their statistics provided by a big information house, such as STATS, Inc. However, we here at the Mistake by the Lake Sporting Times are nothing if not enterprising (and cheap). So, Corey and I elect to tabulate our own moral results each week based on our interviews with coaches and players and the reports we receive from our team of scouts. That's how we're able to consistently give you the most accurate report about the morally victorious or vanquished on the web each week. But for those of you looking for even more moral statistics, it's time to get excited (and your checkbooks). We hope to unveil the Mistake by the Lake Sporting Times Exclusive Moral Database Platinum Edition soon after New Year's!

Hey guys,

In all seriousness, if you were running the Browns, when would you insert Brady Quinn?

"R. Montague"
Berea, OH

Alex says: Before this season, I made the case for keeping Brady Quinn on the bench for the entire 2007 season. Keep in mind that this came at a time when Charlie Frye was still the lame-duck starter and Derek Anderson was the guy who had a really nice scramble against the Chiefs in overtime once. I hesitate to use the word breakout, since so much of his success is predicated on the remade offensive line, but there was no way to foresee the breakout of Anderson before Week 2.

After six games now, I think it'd be best to not mess with a good thing. Quinn is obviously the guy for the future, but barring Anderson channeling Spergon Wynn in the next couple months, it'd be best for everyone involved (fans included) to leave the debates until 2008. Basically, what I wrote at the beginning of the season still holds and is now even easier to palate thanks to the unexpectedly good play of Derek Anderson.

Corey and Alex,

I know Pro Bowl voting is based on either popularity, or overreacting to fluky early-season stats, but will this be the year the Browns finally return a player to Honolulu?

F. Le Duc
McMurdo Station, Antarctica

Alex says: We've campaigned for plenty of Browns to make that fateful trip to Honolulu. Leigh Bodden has deserved a spot for two years running and probably still does. But only established "Pro Bowlers" could get elected when playing with such a bad unit. Last year looked like the year for Borg Phil Dawson, who was both making field goals and booming kickoffs. Alas, mid-way through the season, he assimilated to the rest of the league and became severely mediocre. The Browns' best chance should lie in Ryan Pontbriand. He's been the best long snapper in the league since being drafted. If there's a way that Pontbriand could be better, I want to know. Seriously! Just e-mail us. Though for some reason, Pontbriand keeps being passed over and I don't think this year will be any different. (Corey says: do they even elect long snappers?)

So it comes down to the left side of the offensive line. As Corey and I have pointed out many times before, both Joe Thomas and Eric Steinbach have been fantastic and better than advertised. Thomas being a high pick and Steinbach a big name free agent this summer, they have the name recognition necessary to get elected. They've started to garner some national attention for their play. And Steinbach even has the shiny "Pro Bowler" tag.

Realistically, either one making the Pro Bowl is a long shot. For offensive linemen, they either have to be perennial Pro Bowlers or play on very good teams to make it. So, unless the Browns go on a tremendous tear down the stretch, Honolulu will once again be orange-and-brown-less this February.

Corey says: I think we have to separate the questions of who deserves Pro Bowl consideration and who will get it. The "retention rates" for Pro Bowl lineman, for whom there are basically no mainstream statistics, are ridiculously high (meaning the same guys get elected every year, based on reputation). Because of this, I don't like Joe Thomas' chances at all (ask again in a few years). Steinbach, maybe.

On the other end of the spectrum, we have quarterbacks, for whom there are plenty of mainstream stats out there. The retention rates for Pro Bowl QBs are pretty low, suggesting that the voting is tied more to in-season stats (which fluctuate, unlike "reputation"). Same goes for receivers and running backs, although to a lesser extent. Based on this, I like the Pro Bowl chances of Braylon Edwards and Kellen Winslow—in that order—best. The most deserving player is Joe Thomas, but honestly, how would anyone outside of Cleveland possibly know that?

Dear Mistakesports.com,

I know you guys have been hating on Jamal Lewis for years now. Now that the season is almost half over, what do you think of him? Any difference?

Julie Davner
Casper, WY

Alex says: Julie, call me Bob Dolgan, because I am glad you asked! Treacherous readers won't remember that I swiftly came out against the Jamal Lewis signing. I looked into his statistics, and those of his backups in Baltimore, and found a disturbing trend: not only has Lewis been getting worse over time, but he's been regularly outperformed by second-string players. And in the six games of 2007, things are no different.

Here are some rushing statistics for Lewis and Jason Wright through this week. (Jerome Harrison doesn't have enough carries to qualify for Football Outsiders' stat page.)

      Runs    DVOA  DPAR  Succ.
Lewis   77  -17.2%  -0.5   38%
Wright  39  -13.9%  -0.4   44%

And some receiving statistics:

      Pass   DVOA  DPAR  Cat%
Lewis    6  17.4%   0.8   67%
Wright  14  17.8%   2.1   64%

At the very least, Jason Wright has been no worse than Lewis and at 7% of the cost! If you throw in Jerome Harrison, that's two serviceable running backs for 15% of the price for Jamal Lewis. Now neither Wright nor Harrison has been a world beater. Nor has Lewis been a complete bust. But their performances are comparable and for the amount of money the Browns spent on a big name like Lewis, there shouldn't even be a discussion about whether he's better than his nobody backup. Some big name free agents are worth it (Eric Steinbach is certainly looking that way), but some, like Jamal Lewis, are better left for stupider teams to sign.

Dear Mistke with the Lake SPort Time,

What are the odds of the Browns making the playoffs this year?

Ludmilla
Youngstown, OH

Corey says: That's a good question. It's certainly a surprise to most Browns fans that's we're even having this discussion at the bye week. But with losses by both the Steelers and the Ravens this weekend, it's actually possible for the Browns to own a share of first place as early as next Sunday, if they beat the Rams (the only other thing they would need is a Bengals victory over Pittsburgh).

Football Outsiders' Playoff Odds Report, which hasn't yet been updated to reflect Week 7 results, puts the Browns' playoff chances at 17.1%, with a 5.3% chance of winning the AFC North outright. Of course, those odds are going to rise when the report gets updated, considering the already-mentioned defeats of the Steelers and Ravens. (Although, to be fair, the fact that Tennessee, Kansas City, and Denver all won their games can only hurt the Browns.) This is completely made up, but I would guess that the Browns' overall playoff odds will have risen to about 25% once the Week 7 results are factored into the system.

Hey guys,

Any thoughts on the Indians game tonight?

A. Readers
Anytown, USA

Corey says: La la la la la—I can't hear you!!!!!!

This Week on Josh's Cribbs

Corey says: Episode 6 of Josh's Cribbs finds our hero back at the tattoo parlor from Episode 3. He wants to surprise his wife Maria with some new ink. Later, Josh and Maria join up with the crew from Episode 4: the Dinkinses (TE Darnell and his wife), the Carters (WR Tim and his wife), and the Gomillion Wrights (RB Jason and his fiancée). They have decided they will spend the day working as employees at the Dairy Queen in Elyria, OH. This is not for charity, mind you—this is, like, for fun. So anyway, they show up, the manager teaches them how to make perfect ice cream cones (Dinkins is a natural; Jason Wright is a train wreck), and then they literally work a shift at the drive-thru window—Dinkins and Wright taking orders; Cribbs and Carter working the grill and fryer, respectively. The wives don't seem to do much, besides snacking and gossiping. Later, the wives decide to lock the four Browns players (plus the store manager) in the walk-in freezer. Cribbs implores Dinkins to use his Hulk-like tight end powers to claw them out. Wright appears to be genuinely freaked out. Eventually, the wives open the door, and a good laugh is had by all. All told, this may have been my favorite episode of Josh's Cribbs yet. I can't wait to see what else is in store!

Pythagorean Moral Standings

The idle Browns took a week to review their moral game plan, as they gear up to attempt the perfect moral record that barely eluded them last year. They have outperformed their Pythagorean moral record by about .150 percentage points so far. Elsewhere, the Steelers suffered a major moral blow, while the Bengals' moral victory over the Jets brought them closer to .500. The Ravens... well, you know.

            PMW   PML   pct
Cleveland   5.1   0.9  .850
Pittsburgh  3.0   3.0  .500
Cincinnati  2.8   3.2  .467
Baltimore   0.0   7.0  .000

Next week: Cleveland... the Dawg Pound—the perfect long snapping—the striped socks. St. Louis... the Gateway Arch—the, uh... other stuff. There's only ONE October!!!* And you can read all about the Browns' thrilling victory over the Rams on another edition of "Born and Raised on the Cleveland Browns." See you then!

*per year

Heading into Game 7, the prevailing feeling will undoubtedly be that the Red Sox have the momentum and are therefore likely to win the game. Myself, I can't help feeling down about the Indians' loss in Game 6, but I wanted to know whether this piece of conventional wisdom about "momentum" has a basis in history. (Spoiler alert: it does.)

After the Game 4 victory, we all saw the graphic: 65 teams have taken 3-1 leads in best-of-seven series; 55 of them have gone on to win. Of course, a lot of them (most, in fact) went on to win 4-1 or 4-2. I'm more interested in knowing what happens when a team, down 3-1, forces a Game 7 (thus implying a huge momentum swing).

Some quick research reveals 14 such instances—not a lot to go on, I realize. Still, 10 out of 14 times, the team with the momentum went on to win the series. Only 4 teams out of 14 have managed to "plug the dam", so to speak, and win Game 7 after blowing a 3-1 series lead. They are:

• 1992 Atlanta Braves—let Pittsburgh get back into the NLCS, only to seal the deal in Game 7, thanks to Francisco Cabrera's game-winning single in the bottom of the 9th.
• 1972 Oakland A's—held off the Reds to win the World Series.
• 1967 St. Louis Cardinals—withstood a Red Sox rally to win the World Series.
• 1912 Boston Red Sox—won the World Series in 8 games (Game 2 ended in a tie) despite a late surge by the New York Giants.

Now, you might be feeling so depressed right now that a 4-in-14 chance sounds pretty good, but I expected to find the effects of "momentum" to be less pronounced than this.

That said, there have been 47 game 7s in baseball postseason history. In those games, the team that forced Game 7 (that is, the team that won Game 6) was victorious only 26 times. That leaves 21 times that the team who blew their shot in Game 6 made up for it in Game 7. As an Indians fan, a 21-in-47 chance sounds pretty nice, right about now.

So what is my point? Nothing, really. In a very small sample of 14 "momentum swinging" series, the team with the momentum usually went on to win. Now, is this trend going to make Jake Westbrook pitch worse than he would otherwise? Is it going to make the Red Sox "try harder"? I don't believe so. But it certainly doesn't look good for the Indians.

Casey Blake isn't the only one to have forsaken playoff face-shaving.



Sorry, Alex, I couldn't resist.

It's late and I'm having trouble falling asleep. Tonight's game has left me—like many of you, I'm sure—disturbed. I'm worried about the Indians traveling back to Boston and blowing the Championship Series. And I suspect I'm overreacting, but I have the sneaking feeling that Game 5 was so pivotal that the Indians are now the underdog. I took refuge in cold, unfeeling math. Maybe that would help.

Let's assume that the Indians have an equal chance of winning any game at Fenway Park, regardless of starting pitchers, matchups, or anything else. Unfortunately, we're not sure what that number is. It could be one-half, one-third, one-tenth… who knows? Rather than trying to find that number, I'll go about things a little backwardly. Instead of using the Indians' probability of winning a game to figure out their chances of winning the A.L.C.S., I'd like to know what the Tribe's probability of winning a game in Boston must be for them to have exactly a 50% shot of going to the World Series. Here goes:

I'll call the Indians chances of winning Game 6 x. And, since one team always wins and the other always loses, the Red Sox's chances are 1-x. These same numbers hold for a possible Game 7. Yet, the Indians chances of winning the series are much higher than just x or 2x. They need take only one of a possible two games.

It's simpler to think about it from the Red Sox's perspective. To win the series, they have to win Game 6 and Game 7, the probability of which being (1-x)², or x²-2x+1. The Indians' probability of winning the series therefore is whatever's left over, or 1-(x²-2x+1), which equals 2x-x². For the Tribe's chances to be exactly 50-50, we need to solve the equation 2x-x²=.5. I'll spare you more math and tell you that x=.293.

So, if my earlier assumption that the Indians are equally likely to win Game 6 or 7 still holds, you'd have to believe that they have a less than 30% chance of winning either one to rightfully consider them the underdog at this point. And, considering that away teams' Pythagorean winning percentage at Fenway in 2007 was .369 or that visitors in the playoffs have won 46% of the time since 1995, maybe things aren't too dire. Ask me after Game 6.

[Update: Baseball Prospectus pegs the Indians chances of taking the A.L.C.S. at 74.4066%. Working backwards again, B.P. believes the Indians' probability of winning at Fenway to be approximately 49.4%. Even better!]

Recently, I half-jokingly complained about the fact that the number of good baseball blogs is growing to the point where many of my own opinions about the Indians are simply better expressed by other people. What would be the point of wasting your time with one of my B+ posts when someone else on some other blog is busy hitting the nail on the head with an A+?

This is another example. The subject (Chief Wahoo and racism) is something I've intended to write about ever since we started this blog in 2004, but I've always found an excuse to put it off. Now I feel like anything I could think to say on the subject would just pale in comparison to what I've just finished reading on Joe Posnanski's blog.

So, sheepishly, the best I can do is ask you to click the link above and consider what Mr. Posnanski has to say. Maybe someday I'll think of a way to add my voice to this debate without plagiarizing his material!

At the risk of holding this discussion slightly prematurely, I was curious to know who currently leads the Indians in Win Probability Added (WPA) in the postseason so far. To calculate a player's WPA for, say, a single at-bat, take the team's probability of winning at the beginning of the at-bat, and compare it to the team's probability at the end of the at-bat. The resulting statistic (which is cumulative, by the way) may not tell you much about how well a player is performing overall (it won't assign much credit, for example, for a home run hit at the end of a huge blowout), but it will give you an excellent idea of how large a player's impact was over the outcome of a given game. I find this information particularly intriguing when looking at a small sample size, like the playoffs.

So, as long as we all understand that this list does not represent the Indians' Best Postseason Performers, it could probably be called Biggest Postseason Heroes (So Far):

              WPA
Sizemore     0.753
Betancourt   0.451
Byrd         0.353
Nixon        0.339
Carmona      0.319
Peralta      0.297
Lewis        0.253
Lofton       0.152
Martinez     0.148
Mastny       0.145
Borowski     0.130
Shoppach     0.107
Michaels     0.042
Barfield     0.038
Gomez       -0.001
Perez       -0.006
Hafner      -0.034
Garko       -0.072
Fultz       -0.109
Westbrook   -0.127
Gutierrez   -0.163
Blake       -0.314
Sabathia    -0.340
Cabrera     -0.364

It shouldn't shock anyone to see Sizemore and Betancourt at the top of the list, but there are some surprising names up there. It gives you an idea of how, year after year, sub-par players like David Eckstein and Derek Lowe can be anointed postseason gods: the playoffs are such a small sample size that one at-bat—a dinky single, even—can instantly make you the team leader in postseason WPA. Almost all of Trot Nixon's .339 points of WPA came in a single at-bat: his RBI single in the top of the 11th in Game 2 of the ALCS. According to fangraphs.com, the Indians' probability of winning Game 2 before Trot strode to the plate was about 57.9%. After Trot singled, the Indians' probability of winning the game rose to about 87.9%—thus, Trot was credited with .300 points of WPA.

This made me wonder: was Trot's performance in Game 2 of the ALCS the most impactful single-game performance by an Indian in the postseason this year, in terms of WPA? Let's check:

                 WPA       game
1. Sizemore     0.591   ALDS Game 2
2. Carmona      0.484   ALDS Game 2
3. Peralta      0.307   ALCS Game 2
4. Nixon        0.304   ALCS Game 2
5. Perez        0.295   ALDS Game 2
6. Betancourt   0.274   ALCS Game 2
7. Byrd         0.252   ALCS Game 4
8. Westbrook    0.221   ALCS Game 3
9. Lewis        0.197   ALCS Game 2
10. Lofton      0.181   ALCS Game 3

In Game 2 against the Yankees (aka "The Bug Game"), three Indians accounted for almost all of the team's success. Grady Sizemore earned .155 points of WPA with a lead-off triple in the 6th inning, and .407 points of WPA in the 8th inning for walking, advancing to 2nd on a wild pitch, and scoring on another wild pitch (thanks, midges!). Fausto Carmona racked up .484 points of WPA for his nine innings of total domination. And Rafael Perez earned .295 points for cruising through the two highest-leverage innings of the game.

The rest of the high-impact single-game performances include: Jhonny Peralta's monster performance in Game 2 at Fenway, Nixon's aforementioned tie-breaker in the same game, and Rafael Betancourt's two extremely high-leverage innings of shutout ball in—say it with me—ALCS Game 2. The highest-impact single-game performance that didn't come in Game 2 of a series was Paul Byrd's start last night.

Again, WPA doesn't tell you whose performance has been best, but it gives you an idea of who has been the hero, so to speak. I'll try to update these lists as more postseason games are played, because, as you know, anyone can shoot to the top in a single at-bat! Go, Tribe, go!

This Indians postseason run is turning into one of the most exciting in franchise history. All of Cleveland is vibrating with vibrant, feverish fever. Naturally, I, too, have gotten swept up in Indians mania, with the Tribe now leading the Red Sox 2-1 in the ALCS. I would be lying if I said I didn't have a dream last night about the Indians and Rockies, slugging it out in extra innings in Game 7 of the Bizarro World Series at a snow-covered Bizarro Jacobs Field, snowflakes and giant hail stones flying every which way.

For now, though, I would like to call your attention to another one of the many fascinating storylines running through the '07 postseason. This is a subplot I guarantee you won't read about on any other Indians blog, but believe me when I tell you that history has a chance to be made.

I'm referring, of course, to the remarkable comeback attempt of local hero Mustard in the Jacobs Field Hot Dog Derby.

You may recall that Mustard has spent almost all of the 2007 season trailing the evil Ketchup, whose reign at the top of the Hot Dog Derby standings has almost certainly been made possible by cheating, lying, and shady back room dealings on the part of the influential Pittsburgh ketchup lobby.

When the season ended, these were the standings:

Ketchup   31
Onion     24
Mustard   23

I thought it was all over. I had no idea the Derby would continue into the postseason! Even then, though, Mustard was gong to have to run the table.

I am happy to report, however, that after a photo finish last night in Game 3 of the ALCS...



...that the standings now look like this:



That's right, Mustard is 3 for 3 in the postseason! He (she?) now trails Ketchup by only 5 races, with, at most, 6 possible Indians home games left! If the Indians can make it to Game 7 of the World Series, and Mustard can continue to run the table, we could be witnessing the greatest comeback in the history of between-innings entertainment competition! Go, Mustard, go!

Update, 10/17: Friend of the blog Karen reports that Mustard won again last night!!! Four back with (potentially) five to go! He's like the Colorado Rockies of baseball, this one!

Something is seriously wrong with the Browns' defense. Against an offense with one obvious weapon and a pedestrian, inexperienced quarterback, they gave up 21 second-half points only to be saved copious amounts of blame by the Browns offense out-scoring the Dolphins.

Many times Cleo Lemon was able to wait in the pocket and throw to a very open receiver. Fortunately, he often overthrew said receiver. (Chris Chambers could've had two or three touchdown catches.) Too many times to count, Ronnie Brown looked to be stuffed behind the line on an important third down only to escape and get enough yardage to convert. Both in pass and run defense, the unit looked shaky. And all of this came against a below-average offense!

So what's going on? To my untrained eye, I think all of this stems from two distinct problems: (1) the front seven's inability to regularly create pressure, and (2) too many broken tackles.

The struggles in the passing game aren't for a lack of good coverage. It's just that nearly any cornerback in the league will get beat eventually, given enough time. They're relying on their teammates to force the quarterback into making a throw before the wide receiver gets open. That's just not happening with the Browns. If the Browns could penetrate better, I think the Browns could turn from one of the worst to an above-average pass defense instantly.

As for tackling, that's coaching, isn't it? Poor tackling didn't plague the team last year, if I remember correctly. So it's pretty weird that it's happening now. I'm sure the coaching staff has long known about this and they're aren't any obvious solutions besides um... tackling better?

Fortunately, the Browns are heading into their bye week now, which makes for a perfect time to bone up on blitz/stunt packages and tackling form. One can hope!

Corey says: Alex, I'm sorry to butt in on your intro, but I really want to respond. This is something I very, very rarely have cause to say, but... I couldn't disagree with you more. I believe the struggles in the passing defense are for a lack of good coverage. Every Browns opponent this season has found a way to get its receivers wide, wide open. Furthermore, taking the Miami game as an example, I believe the Browns front seven was able to apply consistent pressure. Even though that pressure didn't result in many sacks, Cleo Lemon was constantly flushed out of the pocket and forced to improvise (also, a ton of passes were tipped or batted down by defensive linemen). Watching the Dolphins offensive line, I was reminded of the Browns O-Line of seasons past (seeing L.J. Shelton in there really took me back). Personally, I feel the culprits for the Browns' defensive struggles are Eric Wright, Brodney Pool, and, to a lesser extent, Sean Jones and the linebackers assigned to drop back into pass coverage (common example: D'Qwell Jackson).

As for missed tackles, that did seem to plague the Browns this week, but I don't recall it being a serious issue prior to this week. Further, I'm not convinced poor tackling is all that costly a weakness, as weaknesses go. If your scheme is solid, but you miss a tackle, you end up surrendering another, what, five yards or less? As we know, it's much more important to stop the pass than to stop the run; missing a tackle is somewhat akin to surrendering a successful running play. It's not necessarily that costly a mistake to make. Sorry to rant—shouldn't we be talking about how great the offense was, anyway? Let's do this thing...

Play of the Week

Alex says: The Browns (offense) had many highlights on the day and Braylon's three touchdowns will likely get the most airplay in game reports. But the play I found most impressive came during the team's one-minute drill at the end of the first half. After a few passing plays and a nice scramble, the offense was still outside of field goal range with 15 seconds left. Kellen Winslow lined up in the slot and ran right past the pathetic cheater Joey Porter. Derek Anderson threw a great pass and suddenly the Browns were on the doorstep of the endzone with eight seconds left. I think this kind of frantic drive really complements the offense's strengths. I'd love to see what kind of damage they could do running the no huddle outside of end-of-half situations.

Corey says: Given the offense's dominance and the defense's struggles, I will resist the temptation to name Leigh Bodden's gorgeous interception (which was directly the result of Willie McGinest's instant pressure in the backfield), and will instead give Play of the Week to Braylon Edwards' gorgeous streaking 17-yard reception on the Browns' first drive of the game. This play, along with Michael Lehan's pass interference penalty on Joe Jurevicius, was what produced the first touchdown of the game. People will wrongly give Jason Gomillion Wright credit for his 1-yard touchdown run, but really, it was Derek Anderson, Braylon Edwards, Kellen Winslow, and company who were responsible for six of the Browns' seven scoring drives (the other being the "Jerome Harrison drive"—see below).

Player of the Week

Alex says: At the end of last season, Jerome Harrison ranked fourth-to-last in the entire league in rushing DPAR and amazingly did so in only 20 carries. I wasn't prepared to write off his entire career, but things weren't looking good. This week though, Harrison saw the most action of his young career, likely because he was wildly successful. In only nine touches, he gained 69 yards and 4 first downs (almost all of which came on a single drive). His success rate, both as a runner and receiver, was 78%. While his (and Jason Wright's, for that matter) performance may not be repeatable against a more talented defense, they certainly make the running back situation more interesting as the season goes along. The coaching staff would have to be idiots not to start rotating both Wright and Harrison in more often to spell a healthy Jamal Lewis.

Corey says: In the Browns' previous two wins, we've been enthusiastic about the offense but reserved in our analysis of Derek Anderson. Well this week, I've got to give credit where credit is due. Anderson played a great game. Only 7 passes were incomplete, and of those, 2 were readily catchable (but dropped) and 2 were cases of Anderson smartly throwing the ball away. Unlike in previous weeks, Derek's game was mistake-free. Honorable mentions go to former Brown (and none-time Player of the Week) and current Dolphins tackle L.J. Shelton, as well as Dolphins guard Rex "Had So!" Hadnot. Those guys did a lot to help the Browns' cause this week.

Quote of the Week

Alex says:

"We're winning the games we're supposed to win." —Kellen Winslow

Using Corey's previews as a level-headed guide to whether the Browns should win a given game, let's check as to whether they're indeed winning the games they should.

• vs. Steelers – DVOA suggested: should lose, result: loss
• vs. Bengals – DVOA suggested: should lose, result: win
• at Raiders – DVOA suggested: should win, result: loss
• vs. Ravens – DVOA suggested: should lose, result: win
• at Patriots – DVOA suggested: should lose, result: loss
• vs. Dolphins – DVOA suggested: should win, result: win

What I take from all this, besides the fact that the numbers have rarely been in the Browns' favor, is that the Browns haven't necessarily been winning games they were supposed to. They probably should've beaten Oakland and lost to Cincinnati, but hey, Corey readily admitted they were close matchups.

Corey says:

"Using my arm strength is how I got to this level. Now when I take chances, they're educated chances." —Derek Anderson

I really don't want to pick on Anderson this week, but the postgame interviews offered slim pickings this time around, and if you've read our blog for long, you know I can't resist poking holes in the postgame statements of Browns players and coaches. When Anderson says "now"—referring to the period during which he makes good decisions—does he mean the last 1 day? If so, this is awesome news! In between Weeks 5 and 6, Derek Anderson learned he has to stop making bad decisions. We are now in store for an MVP-caliber performance the rest of the way!

Ryan Pontbriand Honorary Special Teams Moment of the Week

Alex says: I can't not point out whenever national hero Ryan Pontbriand makes a tackle, especially on a rangy speedster like Ted Ginn. It came on the DZast-er's first punt following a three-week injury absence (R.I.P. Scott Player). Ginn tried to make his way through the middle of the punt coverage team but the always-dangerous Pontbriand was just too quick for him and brought him down easily. With 1 tackle on the year, I think we can now place him among the league leaders in longsnapping tackles.

Corey says: Even in another low key week for the special teams, Josh Cribbs returned a kickoff—the opening one—39 yards, and picked up another 15 yards on an unnecessary roughness penalty by Dolphins kicker Jay Feely. I honestly expected at least one return to go for longer than this, given the weakness of the Dolphins' kickoff unit and the strength of the Browns', but a 40-yard return is still pretty darn good, and if we consider it a 65-yard return, hey, it's even better!

Rudy Kuechenberg Memorial Obscure Brown of the Week

Alex says: Who's the Brown you're least likely to recognize if you saw him walking down the street? My vote goes to backup punter, and current resident of the Non-Football Injury Reserve, Kyle Basler. Among the many things that make Kyle so fascinating is that he "enjoys listening to music and watching movies." Hey! I enjoy listening to music and watching movies too! Kyle, if you're reading this, I think we should be best friends. We could listen to music and watch movies together. It would be totally awesome. P.S. "Küchenberg" translates from German to "Culinary mountain."

Corey says: Continuing my "least likely to" series (which I see Alex has decided to adopt), this week I'm trying to tab the Obscure Brown who's least likely to still be on the roster at the end of the season. How about defensive lineman Louis Leonard, picked up off the waiver wire this week from the Rams? Leonard meets all the criteria for a truly great Obscure Brown of the Week: no one on the planet has heard of him, and he has an excellent middle name (Appreicio). Okay, so those are the only 2 criteria. Good luck holding on to a roster spot, Louis! I'll be rooting for you!

Fashion Item of the Week

Alex says: For lack of a better idea, I was browsing the Browns team shop when I happened upon this which is just ridiculous. Needless to say, I bought 10. It makes a great gift!

Corey says: For weeks now, I have been wondering what was up with the green dots on the backs of NFL quarterbacks' helmets. Well, I finally decided to just look it up on the internet—the dots denote the players whose helmets are wired for radio communication with the coaching staff; only one such player is allowed on the field at a time. Fair enough—it still seems completely unnecessary to me. For what it's worth, they seem to have (intentionally) chosen the one color (lime green) that doesn't fit into the color scheme of a single NFL team (except maybe Seattle), but honestly, is there a color on Earth that clashes more horribly with the Browns' color scheme in particular?

Idiot of the Week

Alex says: On the opening kickoff, Patrick Cobbs tackled Josh "MTV" Cribbs into the Browns bench way after he'd already run out of bounds. So, Cribbs's teammates forcefully removed Cobbs from their comrade, with good reason. For some reason, the Miami kicker, Jay Feely, thought this a good time to get involved and threw himself into the fray. Why he's stupid enough to do this is anyone's guess. Besides escaping with his life, Feely also received the gift of an unnecessary roughness penalty. Now, when was the last time a kicker got one of those?

Corey says: Here are two quotes from early in the week, courtesy the Idiot of the Week—who else?—Joey Porter:

"[Winslow]'s a receiver, really. He's not a tight end, because he's not going to block anybody. If you ask me who's going to win the Joey Porter-Kellen Winslow battle: me."

"It really hasn't been a war. It's been one-sided. I've never lost to him."

Well, now that we have the benefit of hindsight, let's see… wrong, and… wrong. By the way, even if it were true that Kellen Winslow doesn't block anybody (which I believe is an exaggeration), so what? So Winslow's a receiver—he's still a receiver that racks up 100 yards a game, and whose team put up 41 points on Joey Porter's team. Sometimes, the life, it is good, no?

Number of the Week

Alex says: 0, or the number of times that Derek Anderson was knocked to the ground. I know I've touched on it before, but it needs to be said: what an amazing job by the offensive line this week. After all these years of being mistreated (as a fan) by terrible offensive lines, I'll never become ungrateful for what Phil Savage and Romeo Crennel have brought to this year's team. The big-name additions, Joe Thomas and Eric Steinbach, have been great. But I also would like to recognize Hank Fraley, Seth McKinney, and Kevin Shaffer for doing their part as well. Seriously, I'm amazed.

Corey says: I know it's really early to be thinking about things like this, but you may get a kick out of perusing Football Outsider's Playoff Odds page, which is modeled after Baseball Prospectus' famous version. Heading into Week 6, FO gave the Browns a 9.0% chance of reaching the postseason (and a 2.3% chance of winning the AFC North outright), which seemed about right. Of course, those numbers will increase slightly once Week 6 results are factored in. The report should be updated some time Monday, so check back.

This Week on Josh's Cribbs

Corey says: Episode 5 of Cleveland's favorite reality show introduces us to Josh's parents. Even though Josh is late to pick them up at the airport, they gush gushingly about their son's achievements, walking us through his formative years. We learn Josh's childhood nickname was "Tiger" (because he was fast). We also get to see lots of adorable baby pictures and action shots of Cribbs playing baseball, basketball, and football. Later, we join Josh as he visits a local youth football camp, running drills with the kids, and delivering a big pep talk. At the end, the kids get to ask Josh some questions, among them "Have you ever been hit by Brian Urlacher?" (answer: yes), "Have you ever been hit by Troy Polamalu?" (answer: no), "Have you ever been hit by Ray Lewis?" (answer: no), and "What do you think of the Steelers?" (answer: "I hate them").

Pythagorean Moral Standings

The boys in orange and brown cruised to another moral victory this week, thanks to excellent control of quality by Defensive Quality Control Coach Umberto Leone. They increased their league-leading morality differential for the sixth consecutive week. Pittsburgh escaped a moral loss thanks to their bye. The Bengals eked out a Pythagorean moral tie against Kansas City this week. And finally, the Ravens were morally pasted by the Rams, for no reason in particular.

            PMW   PML   pct
Cleveland   5.1   0.9  .850
Pittsburgh  2.8   2.2  .560
Cincinnati  2.1   2.9  .420
Baltimore   0.0   6.0  .000

Next week: You may think that because the Browns have a bye week, they'll go back to figurative drawing board. Except the truth of the matter is that the rest of the league is going back to the drawing board because the Browns are so freaking good. Yeah, that's right. Anyway, we'll answer all of those exciting reader e-mails on the next exciting edition of Born and Raised on the Cleveland Browns!

I don't have time for chit-chat; there's baseball to watch soon! Let's preview.

As always, the stats in this preview come from Football Outsiders' DVOA reports. Click here for an explanation of how DVOA works.

Browns offense vs. Dolphins defense:

           CLE offense  MIA defense
total DVOA    -3.0%        18.1%
passing        2.3%        18.2%
rushing       -9.7%        18.1%

The Browns now rank 18th in offensive DVOA, with a pretty decent passing game and a subpar running game. Derek Anderson, despite his bad game against the Patriots, ranks 10th in the league in passing DPAR (24.8) and 11th in passing DVOA (23.2%). Braylon Edwards ranks 5th in receiving DPAR among WRS (12.9), while Kellen Winslow ranks 4th among TEs (11.0). No surprises there.

The Dolphins' D has been awful this year, ranking 31st in defensive DVOA. The passing defense, ranked 26th, actually does an excellent job covering passes to tight ends (-56.7%, ranked 3rd), running backs (-72.3%, ranked 2nd), and "other" receivers (-35.6%, ranked 8th), but gives up big gains to #1 receivers (33.2%, ranked 25th) and especially #2 receivers (97.2%, ranked 31st). To me, this suggests they have issues with their starting cornerbacks, Will Allen and former Obscure Brown of the Week Michael Lehan. With Joe Jurevicius ailing, the Browns should do what they can to get Braylon matched up 1-on-1. Especially if they can get him matched up against Lehan; that would be ideal. Advantage: Browns

Dolphins offense vs. Browns defense:

           MIA offense  CLE defense
total DVOA     3.4%        17.5%
passing       -0.3%        38.7%
rushing        8.3%        -5.7%

The Browns rank 30th in defensive DVOA; the passing D ranks 30th as well, while the running D has actually been decent, ranking 15th. I don't have to tell you that the biggest problems remain in the secondary. Thus far, the Browns have struggled to defend passes to nearly all types of receivers.

Luckily, the Dolphins aren't particularly deep at receiver. Chris Chambers perennially ranks as one of the worst receivers in football, by DVOA, but has been about average so far this season with a receiving DVOA of 0.5%. Marty Booker, meanwhile, is sitting at -9.2%. Of course, they will no longer have Trent Green throwing to them—really, all the Dolphins' passing and receiving numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. Cleo Lemon is obviously an unknown commodity, but the odds are good he's worse than Trent Green. That said, the Browns' secondary has been really, really bad... Slight advantage: Dolphins

Special teams matchups:

                        Browns   Dolphins
total DVOA                7.9%      0.2%
FG kicking                0.6       4.9
CLE kickoff vs. MIA KR    0.6       3.3
CLE KR vs. MIA kickoff   12.0      -7.0
CLE punt vs. MIA PR       1.0      -1.6
CLE PR vs. MIA punt       0.3       0.7

The Browns rank 3rd in special teams DVOA, on the strength of the NFL's 2nd-ranked kickoff return team. The news only gets better, as reports are saying the D-Zast-er is now healthy enough to resume his punting duties. Meanwhile, the Dolphins have had the league's best field goal kicking, but—hold on to your hats—suffer from the 3rd-worst kickoff coverage in the entire NFL. Will they dare to put the ball in Cribbs' hands? Let's hope so! Advantage: Browns

Looking at the Dolphins' depth chart, you might expect them to be the worst team in the NFL. So I was surprised to find they rank 20th in overall DVOA (-14.6%). However, the loss of Trent Green is going to hurt them, and anyway, the Browns are ranked one spot higher, with an overall DVOA of -12.6%. All I'm saying is, this has the potential to be a very close game. Enjoy it!

The Indians advancing to the A.L.C.S. certainly warrants recognition—most certainly, in fact! The problem is that all of my bases are covered by other websites. Or, at least, I assume they'll be covered. For baseball, there are other writers doing the kind of analysis I would do, though probably doing a better job. Game 1 isn't until tomorrow night and the best series previews aren't online yet. So, once again, I'll have to try to come up with a fresh angle. Here's what I've got:

An Open Letter to Red Sox Fans

You're annoying.

I'm sorry, but it's the truth. Yes, there are specific Red Sox fans I don't find annoying. And yes, there are also specific Indians fans I find annoying. But for some reason, Red Sox fans as a whole are really annoying. I'm not saying this because I don't like the team—I hate the White Sox much more, though I find their fans (while idiotic) more tolerable.

There are explanations people often trot out to explain away why the "Red Sox Nation" meme is getting out of hand. But it's more than jumping on the bandwagon after 2004, or the pink hats, or being obnoxious. Because if the Indians end up winning it all, I'd welcome everyone within a four-county radius to the Tribe's bandwagon. And all that Mrs. Sizemore merchandise is fine by me. And I appreciate passionate fans, at least during a game.

Going to college on the East Coast (where there is strangely little original custard), I've run into plenty of you and I think I've realized what exactly bothers me so. It's your attitude. The Red Sox are a great team and have been so for five years now. They're approaching Yankee levels of payroll. Yet somehow, non-Red Sox fans are supposed to sympathize with you because the Yankees are the "Evil Empire," can outspend anyone to death, and their fans are pigheaded, overconfident jerks. Sorry, but the Red Sox are in that same boat now. And until you realize that no one is going to sympathize with you anymore, and that your team is a perennial overdog for the rest of eternity, you'll remain the most annoying people in baseball.

But, in the sake of fairness, there are some things I like that relate tangentially to Red Sox fans: I greatly enjoy Fenway Park; the Red Sox have nice uniforms; some Indians' names come out hilariously when pronounced with Boston accent (e.g. by Jerry Remy). Say it with me: Travis Hafner. C.C. Sabathia. Josh Barfield.

Sincerely,
Alex Rubin

This game could have been much, much worse. I'm not going as far as to say I'm happy, per se, with the Browns' performance against the Patriots, but I will say that they performed better than we might have expected. Even with New England's unnecessary touchdown in the final seconds, the Browns still managed to play the Patriots closer than either the Jets, Chargers, Bills, or Bengals could.

On offense, of course, it's never a good thing when a couple of glaring mistakes and missed opportunities sink your team's chances of scoring. But it's certainly better than last season, when it was clear that no amount of mistake-erasing was going to save the Browns from their own self-destructive gameplan. If things continue such that Derek Anderson looks like he's the only glaring problem, I say great—we've got the solution to that particular problem all lined up. We just need to be patient (there's no hurry, don't forget).

On defense, I think we kind of have to give the Browns a pass for one week. They allowed receivers to get ridiculously wide open yet again, but they were facing a passing game that has mowed down its opponents like LeBron mows down bowls of Fruity Pebbles. It's kind of hard to draw conclusions from that. Is 27 points surrendered to an offense that's 85% better than league average any worse than 13 points surrendered to a sub-par offense like the Ravens'? It's hard to say.

The Browns' schedule gets much easier in the next few weeks. Let's have a little bit of patience. Meantime...

Play of the Week

Alex says: When it was conceivable the Browns could still mount a comeback, the Patriots had a third-and-goal from the four yard line. Tom Brady took the snap, turned to his left, and handed the ball to Sammy Morris. But immediately after taking the hand-off, Morris was brought down by Robaire Smith for a three-yard loss. Smith went unblocked and was in perfect position to stop the play. The Patriots had to settle for a field goal and even though the Browns didn't ever make the game close, their red-zone defense remains a strength. Unfortunately, they give up their fair share of touchdowns from outside the red zone to more than compensate.

Corey says: I'll go with the Browns' first touchdown, a 21-yard pass to Tim Carter early in the fourth quarter. It was the Browns' second touchdown of the year in which the receiver's momentum after falling down carried him into the endzone. Of course, this can only happen if the receiver goes untouched, so, uh, good job Tim!

Player of the Week

Alex says: Regular readers know that Corey and I weren't too happy when the Browns signed Jamal Lewis this spring. And they also know there's nothing we love more than an Obscure Brown beating the odds. So, the winner of this category essentially was predetermined when Lewis promptly got injured in the first quarter and "Obscure Brown of the Century nominee" Jason Gomillion Wright got his carries. We've long been proponents of the "running back by committee" school of thought, because historically, the production of a backup tends to equal that of a premier starter on a per-play basis—especially when the starter's numbers are pedestrian to begin with. Which makes Jamal Lewis a prime candidate to be outshone by his backup. A one-game sample is small, but Wright bettered Lewis's season-long numbers in success rate (53% to 37%) against one of the best rush defenses in the league. Wright's performance this week is just more evidence to the fact that specifically, Jamal Lewis has not been the key to the Browns' rushing success so far and, generally, utilizing multiple, low cost running backs is almost always a better strategy than one expensive workhorse back.

Corey says: Braylon Edwards is putting together quite a season so far. He now ranks in the NFL's top 5 in receiving yardage, and, heading into Week 5, ranked 7th in the NFL in receiving DPAR. That was before his 100-yard game against the Patriots. All six of Braylon's receptions this week were for first downs. And even though Edwards was targeted on five more passes that fell incomplete, those of us who watched the game know they weren't all Braylon's fault.

Quote of the Week

Alex says:

"We are very inconsistent right now. We win one; we lose one. Like today, our defense played well for us. They gave us everything we needed playing against this high-powered offense and we just didn't help them. This loss can be attributed to the offense. We put [the defense] in bad situations time and time again. We couldn't get drives consistently." —Braylon Edwards

While I agree with Braylon that the team has been very inconsistent, but I wonder: how could anyone think that the defense played well enough for the Browns to win today? The Browns did a fine job neutralizing Randy Moss but at the cost of leaving other receivers (namely Ben Watson and Donte' Stallworth) open. Though that's to be expected playing New England. They're so talented that in lieu of a perfect game plan, a defense must pick their poison. Personally, I'm more satisfied with the performance of the offense than the defense. Without some of the more idiotic offensive mistakes, the Browns could've turned the game into a shootout. But even removing the same number of defensive mistakes would still have allowed the Patriots to run up the score. I think you could count the number of times the Browns brought pressure on Tom Brady on zero hands.

Corey says:

"You know, Greg, if Webster had a definition for 'competitiveness', it would be 'Trent Green, with a history of the severe concussion he had last year, downfield, trying to throw a block for a teammate.' Are you kidding me?!" —Dan Dierdorf

As you know, word definitions tend to be people, especially when Webster is concerned. So if Webster had a definition for "competitiveness"—which of course he doesn't, but if he did—I, too, would have guessed it would involve Trent Green in some way, shape or form. However, I actually called Webster following yesterday's game, to ask him what his definition for "competitiveness" would be, were he to have one, and much to my surprise, he told me: "Jake Delhomme, with a history of the severe concussion he had last year, downfield, trying to throw a block for a teammate." I know, crazy, right? Because I don't even think Jake Delhomme had a concussion last year.

Ryan Pontbriand Honorary Special Teams Moment of the Week

Alex says: How about Phil Dawson's 41-yard dying-bird kickoff in the third quarter? It landed in the arms of New England linebacker Pierre Woods, who had to call for a fair catch. In the end, New England started their drive at their own 29—worse field position than after two of Dawson's other, more conventional kickoffs. I doubt Human Phil planned it this way. But when you have a kicker with questionable kickoff skills and a poor coverage team, perhaps occasionally kicking it short to a non-returner is a good strategy. Although I'm not suggesting this for the Browns—their coverage has been just fine.

Corey says: The Patriots did an excellent job of neutralizing the Browns' biggest strength: special teams; specifically, the kickoff return team. In fact, the best field position the Browns had following a kickoff return was at the outset of the third quarter, when New England booted the kickoff out of bounds, allowing the Browns to set up at their own 40. Naturally, that play was all Browns. Without the intimidation factor of facing the league's best kickoff return team, Patriots kicker Stephen Gostkowski would never have screwed up so badly!

Mark Kafentzis Memorial Obscure Brown of the Week

Alex says: With no truly obscure Browns (that haven't been featured in this space in recent weeks) making an appearance this week, I'm forced to delve deep into the murky waters of the Browns roster. I've got an Obscure Brown for you who is so obscure that I guarantee he won't even suit up in 2007! That's right, I'm picking Efrem Hill, who is currently on the Injured Reserve list. Like other recent O.B.O.T.W. greats, what Efrem lacks in middle name coolness ("Dale"? Bo-oring…) he makes up for in being the best football-playing alumnus of his alma mater, Samford University. I can also tell from the extensive research I conducted that Efrem has dreadlocks. And maybe a panther's head.

Corey says: My last two Obscure Browns of the Week were players I thought were the least likely for you to have heard of. This week, I'm taking a stab at the question of which player currently on the active roster will be least likely to see any game action whatsoever in 2007? The obvious answer is Ken Dorsey, but that feels like a bit of a cop-out. I'll go with offensive lineman Isaac Sowells, a second-year man out of Indiana (of Indiana). Offensive linemen aren't too likely to appear on special teams, so Isaac's best hope (and our worst nightmare) is an injury to one of the Browns' starting guards. I wish Isaac the best, but if one of the Browns' starting guards has to get injured, please let it be Seth McKinney!

Fashion Item of the Week

Alex says: Brown socks, why do you torment us so? I know the home team decides whether to wear their colors or whites, but I'd like to know who on the Browns chose which variation of whites to wear for this game. The smart money's on Brad Melland, the team's Head Equipment Manager. For any away game, he likely has to choose early on in the week, so they have time to pack up enough pairs of socks for everyone on the team. We need to reach this guy and show him the evils of solid-colored socks. They stink!

Corey says: I don't mean to pile on with the hate for solid-colored socks (wait a minute—yes I do), but the situation is dire, people. Why would you wear solid-colored socks when you have perfectly good striped ones, ready to go? Not only that, am I the only one who thinks the Browns' all-brown socks have gotten darker? If I were tuning in to a Browns game for the first time, I might take a cursory glance at the TV and come away thinking the Browns' colors were orange and black! Imagine that!

Idiot of the Week

Alex says: Everyone in the world except for the Browns, their coaches and staff, and fans.

Corey says: Phoning it in, eh, Alex? Is it October already? Goodness, I suppose it is. Anyway, I have nothing against the Patriots organization, but I resent the New England fans, with their smug smugness and lobster fishing and obnoxious superiority. The worst part is, while the Browns were busy making the Patriots fans feel superior, the Red Sox won their series against the Angels, meaning we may be in store for more obnoxious New England fans, if the Indians can figure out a way to euthanize the Yankees.

Number of the Week

Alex says: 21%, or the Patriots' combined conversion rate on third and fourth downs. For a game in which they scored 34 points, this seems a little low, doesn't it? I went back and checked the play-by-play and yes, the Browns did indeed stop the Patriots 11 out of 14 times on third or fourth down. But there's a catch. New England officially had 70 plays from scrimmage and subtracting the 14 third and fourth down plays leaves 56 snaps on a first or second down. The Patriots earned 23 total first downs against the Browns—one via penalty and three on third or fourth down, leaving 19 first downs on a first or second down. That means that on approximately a third of their first- or second-down plays (33.9%, to be exact) the Patriots gained the necessary yardage for a fresh set of downs. So while the third-down defense wasn't a problem this week (for once), the defense on the first two downs certainly was. Basically, the defense got pummeled all game long. But isn't that what we expected?

Corey says: Who would you guess has been the most interception-prone quarterback in the league this season? Derek Anderson has thrown an interception on 5.03% of his attempts, which ranks him 7th among QBs with at least 50 attempts. Among QBs with at least 100 attempts, Anderson ranks 2nd behind Drew Brees. Don't fret, though: among QBs with exactly 159 attempts, Derek is the least interception-prone QB in all the land!

This Week on Josh's Cribbs

Corey says: On Episode 4 of FSN Ohio's hot new reality show, Josh helps his friend Steve "Chin Man" Sanders (currently of the Browns' practice squad) pick out a new ride. While cruising around in the new car (presumably on a test drive?) Josh and the Chin Man decide to surprise four kids playing backyard football outside an apartment complex. They toss the ball around for a while. Later, Josh and his wife join three other Browns couples (the Carters, the Dinkinses, and the Gomillion Wrights) for a trip to Swings-N-Things, where they (sort of) compete in go-kart racing, squirtgun boat thingie, batting cages, and paintball. The wives seem to wish they weren't there. Overall, I enjoyed this episode immensely. I can't wait to see where this Season 1 story arc is heading!

Pythagorean Moral Standings

The Browns maintain a perfect moral record with a convincing moral victory over the Patriots. They're outperforming their Pythagorean moral record by about 0.8 games so far. The Steelers notched a solid moral win over Seattle. The Bengals enjoyed a bye week, but I have updated the standings to show their Pythagorean moral tie from last Monday night. The Ravens, meanwhile, are sitting at .000 in both moral winning percentage and Pythagorean moral winning percentage. I even ran some numbers to determine Baltimore's overall moral DVOA: -547.88%, which puts them on pace to edge the 2006 Ravens as the worst team ever (morally speaking).

            PMW   PML   pct
Cleveland   4.2   0.8  .840
Pittsburgh  2.8   2.2  .560
Cincinnati  1.6   2.4  .400
Baltimore   0.0   5.0  .000

Next week: The Browns welcome the Miami Dolphins' minor league affiliate to the shores of Lake— what? Those are the actual Miami Dolphins? Seriously? Well, whatever. We'll wrap it all up for you in splendid detail, on another exciting "Born and Raised on the Cleveland Browns"!

Cleveland is just buzzing—buzzing I tell you—over its new minor league hockey team, the Lake Erie Monsters! You may recall my feeble attempt to introduce some hockey coverage into our blog's repertoire about a year and a half ago. I finally made it to my first Barons game, and boy was I pumped to start blogging about those Barons! Turned out it was the last Barons game ever.

But tonight I kept my Cleveland hockey attendance streak alive, taking in the very first Lake Erie Monsters game at Quicken Loans Arena. And let me tell you, it was mon-stupendous!!!



I arrived plenty early, recalling that last time, the best seats I was able to scrounge up at the last minute were first row, center ice. This time, to my surprise, the best available were at the top of section 130, in the corner of the arena.

With some time to kill, I decided to walk the concourse for a little while:



The Monsters merchandise was flying off the shelves! The crowd was clearly as excited as ever. I began to feel like maybe I don't blend in too well at a hockey game. My beard is clearly not beard-y enough.

Finally, they started the game. I snapped a picture of the first couple seconds of Monsters hockey ever:





It was nearly a sell-out. Many fans even chattered in amazement at the fact the upper deck was open!

As the game started to unfold, I did my best to try to remember the rules of hockey. To the best that I could tell, the game involves hitting a little round thing with a big stick, slamming into a glass wall, and having a beard. After a while, it started to come back to me.

Finally, they unveiled the new Monsters mascot. Needless to say, I had high hopes. The last Cleveland hockey mascot, SlapShark, was one of the great mascots in sports history, and he will live on in our hearts forever. So what was it going to be this time? A big tentacled monster? Perhaps a big hairy monster! Or maybe it would be a vaguely shark-like monster with a monocle!



A seagull?! Ga-ga-ga-goink! Are you serious? The new Monsters mascot is named Sullivan C. Goal (get it?) and so far, I am seriously unimpressed. He has no tentacles. He has no dorsal fin. He has no DoubleCapital. He doesn't even have a monocle.

During the first intermission, they played some kind of peewee game, except it was the Parma peewee team versus some adults, who pretended to compete, but (surprise) failed:



When play resumed, the game was still scoreless. After two periods, the Monsters trailed, 1-0 (to the Grand Rapids Griffins, I should have mentioned).

But in the third period, a scoring frenzy broke out. Here's a picture of the celebration following the first Monsters goal ever:



As you undoubtedly know, AHL hockey attracts all the biggest celebrities. Here's a picture of Donyell Marshall being featured on the scoreboard:



Anyway, the Monsters went on to take a 2-1 lead, only to surrender two goals late in the third period. At that point the score was Griffins 3, Monsters 2, and I guess both teams were feeling extremely tired, because they decided to end the game after only three quarters of play:



So the Monsters lost their first game, but it's all good: everyone in attendance seemed to have a really good time. And you can bet we at the Mistake by the Lake Sporting Times will be bringing you weekly Monsters updates from now on!!! (No promises.) Which just leaves one more thing...

Obscure Monster of the Week

Kidding!

Welcome, Indians fans, to another Browns preview! I don't want to distract you from thinking about the Tribe for too long, so let's get right to it.

As always, the stats in this preview come from Football Outsiders' weekly DVOA report. This week, we've finally done away with the early-season weighted statistics—from here on out, it's good old regular DVOA. For a detailed explanation of how DVOA works, click here.

Browns offense vs. Patriots defense:

           CLE offense   NE defense
total DVOA    -1.1%       -20.9%
passing        8.4%       -21.1%
rushing      -12.5%       -20.8%

The Browns now rank 19th in offensive DVOA after a mediocre performance against the (theoretically) strong Ravens defense. The passing offense ranks 13th, as Derek Anderson (21.6 DPAR 31.3% DVOA), Braylon Edwards (9.6, 31.1%), and Kellen Winslow (12.4, 51.0%) have all put up some impressive numbers. The running game, on the other hand, has left something to be desired. I thought this was interesting—take a look at the Browns' distribution of runs in each direction, along with their Adjusted Line Yards (a statistic designed to reflect the contribution of the offensive line) for each type of run:

             freq.    ALY   ALY rank
left end       6%    6.01       3
left tackle   18%    5.31       9
mid/guard     64%    4.25      18
right tackle   8%    3.10      29
right end      2%   -0.48      32

The trend here couldn't be more clear: the lefter, the better. The Browns may only have gone "left end" on 6% of their rushing plays, but they rank 3rd in the NFL on rushes of that nature. Conversely, they are dead last on rushes that go "right end" (though, to be fair, they hardly ever attempt those rushes). So, on whom does this reflect best? I would say Joe Thomas, followed by Eric Steinbach, and so on down the line. I think the Browns should consider running to the left more often than they already do. For one thing, their percentage of runs that have gone between the guards (64%) is the 6th-highest such percentage in the NFL. I know Jamal Lewis is a so-called "power" rusher, but the numbers speak for themselves.

The New England defense ranks 3rd by DVOA. They are maddeningly balanced, too, as the pass defense ranks 4th and the run defense ranks 3rd. For what it's worth, the Patriots' run D has allowed significantly higher Adjusted Line Yards on runs to the left—the offense's left—than on runs to the right. This can play into the Browns' hand, as I've shown. Meanwhile, if there is a chink in the armor of the pass defense, it might be defending passes to tight ends—through 4 weeks of play, the Patriots have allowed a DVOA of 76.3% (ranking 31st) on passes to tight ends. So maybe we'll see Kellen Winslow be able to move the chains. For everyone else, it's going to be a huge struggle. Advantage: Patriots

Patriots offense vs. Browns defense:

            NE offense  CLE defense
total DVOA    46.7%        19.6%
passing       83.2%        44.5%
rushing       17.6%        -7.5%

Can you say "recipe for disaster"? The Browns defense ranks 27th by DVOA, while the Patriots offense ranks 1st. And, while I hate to say it, the matchup that's most likely to make us cringe will be the Patriots' #1 ranked air attack versus the Browns' 30th-ranked pass defense. Make no mistake: when the Patriots pass the ball, they have been about 83% better than an average NFL offense. And when teams pass the ball against the Browns, the Browns have been about 45% worse than an average NFL defense. If the early-season trends hold, we can expect the Patriots to drop 40 points (or more) on the Browns—most of which will come through the air. Huge advantage: Patriots

Special teams matchups:

                        Browns   Patriots
total DVOA               9.7%      4.7%
FG kicking              -0.2      -3.1
CLE kickoff vs. NE KR    0.9       6.4
CLE KR vs. NE kickoff   12.1       5.4
CLE punt vs. NE PR       1.6      -0.4
CLE PR vs. NE punt      -0.1      -1.3

The Browns have risen to 2nd in special teams DVOA, thanks, as usual, to the #1 kickoff return unit in the NFL. On the other hand, the Patriots are no slouches, ranking 9th in special teams DVOA. Unfortunately for the Browns, the strengths of the New England special teams include the #2 kickoff unit in the league (also the #2 kickoff return unit). I don't have to tell you that, for the Browns to remain competitive against the Patriots, the special teams are probably going to have to play a huge role. Advantage: Browns

There is no question that the Patriots are the best team in the NFL right now. I feel quite confident that, if the Browns and Patriots were to play 100 times, the Patriots would win a vast majority of the games. Of course, that doesn't mean they are guaranteed of a victory this Sunday. The Browns are going to need a whole lot of luck, but stranger things have happened. And anyway, we'll always have the Indians...

Only a few hours until the first pitch and I don't really have time to construct my own comprehensive matchup analysis of the Indians and Yankees. Fortunately for you, there are plenty of enlightened baseball writers out there who have done my job for me. If you're looking for a plethora of information about the division series, here are what I've found to be the best previews, from around the web, and their conclusions about the series itself.

• ALDS Preview: Yankees and Indians by Cliff Corcoran:

  So what have we learned? The Yankees run roughshod over the Tribe on offense, but fall short on the mound. Can the Indians superior pitching stop the Yankees superior hitting? Things have gone that way for the Yanks in recent postseasons, but there's something that tells me that the Bombers just might squeak this one out.

• Why the Yankees will beat the Indians by Larry Mahnken

  Do I think the Yankees are going to be the Indians? I really haven’t made up my mind yet. I know they can, and I hope they will, but they have a hard road ahead.
  
  If the Indians get spectacular starting pitching in this series, they’ll probably win.

• Why the Indians will beat the Yankees by Ryan Richards

  To win against the Yankees, you need to play from out in front; the New York offense and back end relief is much too difficult to attempt to play catch up. To that end, the Indians are well equipped to combat these strengths. Their starting pitching is a decided advantage, and they have a bullpen that can keep a lead, at least until the ninth inning. Add in home field advantage and the "short" ALDS schedule, and you can begin to understand why the Indians should win this divisional series.

• Playoff Prospectus: Yankees versus Indians by Jay Jaffe

  The Yankees have a threatening offense, but they appear to have committed to a much less than ideal rotation alignment, and they're at a clear disadvantage when it comes to late-inning matchups. The one-two punch of Sabathia and Carmona could easily push their team to the brink of victory before they even hit the Bronx, where the Yankees will need some good fortune simply to get quality starts. Indians in five.

• And make sure to read Ye Traditional Head To Head Playoff Preview and ALDS: Inside the numbers, both by Steven Goldman. He kind of refuses to write a traditional conclusion, thus ruining my nice little format here. Nevertheless, check 'em out.

Most of the authors quoted hedge their bets well in making their predictions. Sure, you can find plenty of idiots ready and willing to throw all their support behind one team. But, as Corey pointed out, the Indians chances of winning are pretty damn close to 50%. Really, the only evidence I know of to suggest the Indians chances aren't exactly one-in-two is that they have the home-field advantage, which bumps them to a 51% chance of winning. (Seriously, I did the math.)

Fortunately, Baseball Prospectus has once again given the world a wonderful gift, this time in the form of the Postseason Odds report. To explain, here's Clay Davenport:

A Monte Carlo simulation uses random numbers to simulate the playoff series. Each game of the series is given a seperate outcome probability, based on the home team, the team's performance during the regular season, and the expected starting pitcher matchup.

And this year they're factoring in performance against right-handed and left-handed pitchers, which gives the Indians a slight boost, since the Yankees aren't the same hitting juggernauts against lefties. So, in both editions to be published (October 3 and October 4), the Tribe has been given a 55.6% probability of taking the A.L.D.S. And, before any games were played yesterday, they had the third-highest probability of winning the World Series (to the Angels and Cubs) at 14.5%.

Distilling all this down—even accounting for all the advanced knowledge we have of baseball and the various advanced ways we can analyze it, that only amounts to approximately a 5% change in predicting the series winner based on pure luck. It's still a crapshoot. That's what makes the playoffs so exciting and it's also what makes writing a preview about them so frustrating for me. There's no holy grail statistic that will tell us who's going to win three-quarters of the time. And there's no "key matchup" that will decide the series 100% of the time.

That being said, teams do win for a reason, so when the Tribe prevails (or falters) we'll have praise (or blame) to spread around. I know Corey and I are going to follow the playoffs as rabidly as any of you, so keep your eyes peeled for more Indians-related complaining than usual in these parts. I'm now counting the minutes—I can't wait!

A lot of people have been asking me what I think the Indians' chances are of making it to the World Series. They've probably been asking you this too (it's just what you talk about).

Well, Vegas has the Yankees as something like 67% favorites, but that doesn't reflect the odds of either team winning the ALDS; it reflects the public's feelings about the Yankees. The truth is that the Indians' chances of winning the ALDS are about 50%. If they advance, their chances of winning the pennant will be about 50%. And if they reach the World Series, their chances of winning it all will be about 50%.

I look at it like this: say you're the best team in baseball. In a given year, you're probably about a .600 team—meaning, against MLB-average competition, you're about 60% likely to win any given game. Against a playoff opponent—even if they're only the 4th or 5th best team in your league—you're probably not facing MLB-average competition; you're facing slightly tougher competition. So your chances of winning will come down from 60%—they won't dip below 50%, because you're still the better team, but they'll come down. Now your chances of winning a given game are probably something like 55%. And that's if you're the best team in baseball, which the Indians are not. For a team like the Indians, the chances of beating the Yankees in a given playoff game are probably somewhere between 48% and 52%. Stretch that out over a laughably small sample size like a 5- or 7-game series, and basically, you're going to see the "better" team, whoever it is, win about as often as the "worse" team. Trust me when I say that history bears this out.

Now, you can talk about how a specific team matches up against another specific team (in fact, I believe Alex may be preparing a post of that nature). But the differences are always going to be marginal. The Indians have the better starting pitching—it's slightly better than the Yankees'. The Yankees have the better offense, to be sure—it's slightly better than the Indians'. I just don't see the point in making a prediction.

As I hinted, Alex and I hope to bring you some more postseason coverage before the week is out. Our lack of Indians content lately has not been for a lack of interest or enthusiasm. I'm as psyched about the Tribe now as I've been in years. It's just that our goal (and the thing that keeps us interested in blogging) is to provide content that's unique in some way. When it comes to Browns content (as you've seen), this is pretty easy for us, because there just aren't any other blogs out there discussing the Browns with the same style of analysis as ours. But the multitude of great baseball websites has grown so quickly, that's it's hard to come up with something smart to say about the Indians that hasn't already been said—more articulately—on 12 other sites.

(Here's a good example, from Vegas Watch, the same blog I linked above: An Open Letter To Eric Wedge. After reading this, I think, "I couldn't have said it better myself." So why should I try?)

Sorry to rant. My point is that yes, we do hope to publish some more Indians posts soon, but we make no promises. In the meantime, enjoy Game 1, and GO INDIANS!!!

Blink, and you may have missed it. After two drives and two touchdowns, the game was basically over—although we didn't know it at the time. For the rest of the game, the Browns played ultra-conservatively on offense. Case in point: after Braylon's touchdown (which came on a 1st-and-10, by the way), Rob Chudzinski only called one passing play on a first-and-whatever for the rest of the game.

Why? I don't know. But the Browns seemed O.K. with pounding their heads against the wall on first downs. Not counting kneel-downs, they lined up eighteen times with a first down, and on fifteen of those snaps the ball went directly to Jamal Lewis, who didn't do much with it. On first down, he averaged 2.3 yards per carry. Lewis gained two or fewer yards on eleven of those runs.

All of this first-down nonsense was especially stupid considering the report coming into the game: Ravens run defense? Very, very good. Pass defense? Not nearly as good. The uninspired and uncreative play-calling ("Hey, let's pound it up the middle again on 1st-and-10!") was beyond obvious and made no tactical sense. Play to your strengths (passing) and your opponent's weaknesses (pass defense). And when the time came for a good clock-running, the Browns just continued on as usual with two short, unsuccessful runs on first and second down.

The team should consider itself lucky this didn't come back to hurt them in the end. Over the next week, as they prepare for a more balanced team, the coaching staff needs to absorb this week's offensive lessons: pass to set up the run. Not the other way around.

Play of the Week

Alex says: The nail in the coffin generally doesn't come with six minutes left in the first quarter, but the Ravens never could overcome Braylon Edwards 78-yard touchdown. It put the Browns ahead 14-0 and they spent the rest of the game playing very conservatively to hold on to the lead. Despite all this, Baltimore cornerback Chris McAlister simply got turned around. There was no pump fake, no double move. Edwards ran a go route almost imperceptibly towards the middle then cut back towards the sideline and McAlister was toast. Anderson had to weather a minor hit, but Edwards already had a 10-yard cushion when he caught the ball.

Corey says: If I may briefly respond to Alex's introductory remarks for this week, I'm less concerned about the conservative playcalling, in light of the fact it came after the Browns had built a large lead. Granted, if you are going to shift toward the conservative after securing a lead, you ought to do so by degrees, so that you don't get too conservative too early in the game, but this particular Sunday, I'm okay with what the Browns did. What worries me, in the back of my mind, is that, on the basis of this game or games like it, the Browns might confuse correlation and causation (as in the past), and try to make the conservative gameplan work for them before building a sizable lead (as in the past). That would definitely not sit well with me. But anyway... my Play of the Week is also Braylon's touchdown. Plays like that are exactly what the Browns drafted Braylon for in the first place, and it's nice to have a quarterback who, for all his faults, is capable of throwing a ball far enough to make a long pass like that successful. I hope Brady was watching closely!

Player of the Week

Alex says: Leigh Bodden shows up in the box score more than usual this week. His interception is nothing new (although it plays a big part in determining my Player of the Week), but his seven unassisted tackles are strangely un-Bodden. Cornerback tackles are a curious creature. To most fans, they'd like to see CBs get as many tackles as possible since they're one of the few stats collected for individual defenders. For the enlightened, though, they'd rather their favorite cornerbacks didn't get a single tackle. Why? Because CB tackles can only come in two ways: in run support or cleaning up someone else's mess. This week, three of Leigh's tackles resulted in unsuccessful plays for the offense. And three more were on a running back or tight end reception—not his responsibility in coverage. Steve McNair basically avoided Leigh for the afternoon—even his interception came on a pass intended for a tight end.

Corey says: No one really stood out in this game, though a number of guys played well. The defense didn't play as well as the score suggests, allowing wide open pass completions left and right (what else is new?). So I'll go with someone on the offensive side. How about Joe Thomas? It's usually impossible to single out a single offensive lineman—certainly the whole unit had a good game—but Joe continues to look like a real stud, especially in pass protection. See Number of the Week, below, for more on the O-line's dominance in pass coverage.

Quote of the Week

Alex says:

"That wasn't a good decision; it was a great decision!" —Rich Gannon

If you don't recall, Gannon imparted this particular nugget of wisdom during the fourth quarter. Let me set the scene: Leading by two touchdowns, the Browns want to keep the clock running, but face a 3rd-and-7. Derek Anderson drops back, senses pressure, resists throwing into the right flat, and scrambles to his left for two yards before sliding. The clock keeps running, but it's now fourth down. Now as a Browns fan, believe me, I can easily imagine hundreds of worse outcomes for that play—an interception, a sack, a sack-cum-fumble, or even just a really stupid pass that should be intercepted but isn't. Nevertheless, Rich, you know what really would be a great decision in this situation? Converting the first down! It wasn't a broken play and Anderson was able to create time to throw. I'm not suggesting he should've forced a pass or what have you (I was perfectly content with how the play turned out), but save the ridiculous praise for a play that is at least successful.

Corey says:

"We fed off our defense today. Between the fans, who were phenomenal. Any team likes to play at home, but when we play at home, it's something a little bit more special than other places. The fans, they get behind us. I mean, they do their fair share of booing, but we understand them." —Braylon Edwards

Just a great quote all around, as Braylon responds to a question about how the defense played. (If you're curious, he thinks they played superbly.) Let me go on record as saying that I don't think Browns fans are much different than most NFL fans. At the stadium, as a group, they tend to be obnoxious, vulgar, and drunk. That would pretty much make them just like the fans at any NFL stadium, behavior-wise. There are those who'll make the case that Browns fans are particularly loyal, but show me a franchise with as long a tenure as the Browns' whose fans aren't considered fiercely loyal. Regardless, if it's true that the Browns get a bigger boost from their home fans than other teams get from theirs, then wow, the team must have been even worse than we thought these last 8 years!

Ryan Pontbriand Honorary Special Teams Moment of the Week

Alex says: On a second-quarter kickoff, Darnell "Mayor" Dinkins did an excellent job to position his helmet such that it would propel the football out of returner Yamon Figurs's hands. He even managed to account for the location of his teammates, so the ball landed right at David McMillan's feet, for another Baltimore turnover. Although the game was probably out of reach for the Ravens after the opening coin flip, the fumble recovery gave the Browns great position which led to Jamal Lewis's non-touchdown touchdown. And that really ended it. Figuratively speaking, of course.

Corey says: Josh Cribbs took the game's opening kickoff 41 yards, setting the Browns up nicely to take the early lead. It's those 40- and 50-yard returns that go overlooked, but they're huge to the Browns. The kickoff return unit isn't just explosive—it's consistent, and that is a big part of the reason it's ranked #1 in the NFL. Also: today is Ryan Pontbriand's birthday. Hooray!

Mike Junkin Memorial Obscure Brown of the Week

Alex says: Mistake by the Lake Sporting Times favorite Babatunde Oshinowo has moved on to bigger and better things with the Chicago Bears (and, according to my sources, a Nike commercial—no joke), my obscure low-round draft pick love has to be placed on someone else. And that lucky man is this year's seventh-round pick out of Arizona, currently repping it on the practice squad, Mr. Syndric Steptoe! Steptoe Bismol is known mainly for his kick-returning skills, so with Josh Cribbs around to stay, he may seem expendable. But don't forget that old saying, "Every Super Bowl winner needs two really good returners." What's that? That isn't a real saying and I just made it up to rationalize keeping Syndric around? Balderdash! Let's go Steptoe Bismol!

Corey says: Last week, I suggested that LB Kris Griffin might be the obscure Brown you're least likely to have heard of. But it could also be FB Charles Ali, a rookie free agent who, like Griffin, went to a really obscure college (Arkansas-Pine Bluff). Some quick research shows that Ali is not quite the most famous UAPB Golden Lion in the NFL today, but he might be the second-most. Congrats, Charles!

Fashion Item of the Week

Alex says: Now, I wasn't the one at Cleveland Browns Stadium this week, so I can't speak as to whether this actually happens, but Lord, I hope it does. Whenever Scott Player takes the field, or when he's leaving the field, or even as he's sitting on the sideline, the scoreboard operators should play some mix of "American Made" and "Real American" and Scott should spend his time hulking up and putting his hand to his ear, to listen to the crowd. No?

Corey says: There's a souvenir stand near the corner of E. 9th and Lakeside that sells out-of-date merchandise like Frye, Northcutt, and—this is the one that slays me—Ben Taylor jerseys. So, what would you guess would be the going rate for an orange Ben Taylor jersey? Try $20. Am I crazy, or is that a lot to pay for an orange Ben Taylor jersey? Also, am I crazy, or does Jerry not wear glasses?

Idiot of the Week

Alex says: I imagine Ed Reed thinks pretty highly of himself. Sitting at home, or on the sidelines, he'll congratulate himself for being so gosh-darn good at returning an interception or fumble for a touchdown. This fantasy of mine was only confirmed more by Reed's pathetic attempt to avoid tacklers after his pick. Most defensive backs would take the easy path straight towards the end zone and then duck out-of-bounds, but not Reed. He dances and jukes and tries to make sure nothing stops him for the personal glories of scoring. It's generally really annoying, but when it pays off, it's comedy gold! Try searching around for Reed's multiple botched laterals. But as much as I hate Ed Reed, I can't not give this honor to the King of the Idiots, Ray Lewis.

Corey says: There are so many qualified Idiot of the Week candidates to choose from whenever the Browns face the Baltimorons. Unfortunately, 99% of those people will never know the horrible shame of being named Idiot of the Week by the Mistake by the Lake Sporting Times, because so long as there is air left for me to breathe, Ray Lewis has got this award locked up.

Number of the Week

Alex says: 1, or the number of times Derek Anderson was officially knocked down by the Ravens. Once again, the offensive line did a terrific job protecting the quarterback and didn't yield a single sack. Baltimore's only knock-down came early, and the play resulted in a Braylon Edwards touchdown, so perhaps they sent more men into coverage after that to avoid being burned. Anyway, I'm still not accustomed to this whole quarterback-has-time-to-read-the-defense thing or even the running-back-not-tackled-in-the-backfield-immediately situation. I'm loving this offensive line!

Corey says: As a follow-up to that, I would like to point out that, heading into Week 4, the Browns ranked 19th in the league in Adjusted Sack Rate, having given up a sack on roughly 7.1% of passing plays. After this game, they'll probably rank somewhere in the 10th to 15th range, which isn't bad. But wait! 6 of the Browns' 8 sacks came in the first half of the first game of the year—that is to say, with Charlie Frye under center. Now, you may recall from Week 1's Born and Raised that, based on my subjective review of the game footage, 5 of the six Frye sacks were squarely Charlie's fault (the other one was on Kevin Shaffer). My quick 'n' dirty math shows that with Frye as the quarterback, the 2007 Browns gave up a sack on 35.3% of passing plays (a small sample size, to be sure). But with Derek Anderson as quarterback, the 2007 Browns have given up a sack on just 1.6% of passing plays. And that would most definitely rank them 1st in the NFL. I couldn't be happier with what the offensive line has done so far this year.

This Week on Josh's Cribbs

Corey says: If you haven't yet caught an episode of Josh's Cribbs, you're missing the reality show that's sweeping the nation (those parts of it that get FSN Ohio, at least)! I have no idea how many episodes there will be, all told, but as long as they keep airing new ones, I'm going to try to keep you informed. This week, on Episode 3, Josh hung out at a tattoo parlor while his wife had a tattoo on her ankle covered up by a different tattoo (apparently, Josh didn't like the original one). Then Josh and his good friend—wait for it—Syndric Steptoe shot the proverbial breeze. Later, Josh invited some teammates to join him for a friendly bowling contest at the Corner Alley on E. 4th. In attendance were Cribbs, Braylon Edwards, Tim Carter, Travis Wilson, Steptoe Bismol, and Steve Sanders—literally all of the wide receivers who were in camp with the Browns this summer, except one (hint: it was the white one). In the end, while the rest of the guys goofed off and had a jolly time, Braylon handed his teammates' asses to them six ways to Sunday, bowling something like 250 (by my vague recollection). Seriously, that guy can bowl.

Pythagorean Moral Standings

The Browns cruised to an easy (and complete) Pythagorean moral victory, as no fewer than 38 different Browns exacted long-waited revenge on the Ravens for varying reasons. A fourth-quarter collapse against the Cardinals sent the Steelers tumbling down the AFC moral standings, while Cincinnati will face New England on Monday night—we'll have to wait until next week's edition to see how they did.

            PMW   PML   pct
Cleveland   3.3   0.7  .825
Pittsburgh  1.9   2.1  .475
Cincinnati  1.1   1.9  .367
Baltimore   0.0   4.0  .000

Next week: The best team in the NFL will play in Foxboro next Sunday afternoon, as the Browns take on the Patriots. Ah, but which is the team is the best in the league? We'll tell you, on the next hair-raising edition of Born and Raised on the Cleveland Browns! (It's the Browns.)