As you have undoubtedly surmised, Alex and I get a ton of reader mail. We do our best to respond to every inquiry, but with Alex's 13 jobs, my frequent business travel in Eastern Europe, taking care of Gomer (our secret black sheep younger brother), karate practice, surveying the Cuyahoga River watershed, and writing our first novel (a whodunit about the murder of a wealthy Cleveland-area striped socks baron), it can take years—even decades—for us to get back to everyone who writes in.

That's why we usually take time out during the Browns bye week, the MLB All-Star break, or, in this case, the NBA All-Star break, to reply to some letters en masse. Enjoy.

Dear Mistake by the Sports Sporting Times,

It's SO OBVIOUS the Cavs need to trade for a BIG NAME. Until they do that, they're going nowhere. I guarantee it.

S. Frenchman
Mentor, OH

Corey says: You're obviously not the only one who thinks the Cavs need to pull off a trade, Sid. But I feel compelled to point out a few things. One, the Cavs made the NBA Finals last year, with essentially the same roster. Now, that doesn't mean they're guaranteed to make it to the Finals this year, but at no point were they guaranteed (based on their roster or any other factors) to make it last year, either. My point is, the Cavs are capable of winning an NBA title with their current roster, just as they're capable of collapsing and missing the playoffs altogether.

You might argue that the Cavs' path to the Finals is tougher this year than it was last year, and you might be right. The Celtics are probably a tougher #1 seed this year than the Pistons were last year. But the East, as a whole, has gotten worse in 2007-08, and anyway, it's impossible to predict how anyone will fare in a small sample like a playoff series. No one thought the Cavs stood a chance against the Pistons last year, but they won convincingly. Are you prepared to say they have no chance against them again this year?

Finally, I don't equate "big name" with "good trade." For one thing, no one's going to take Larry Hughes off our hands. So what do the Cavs have to offer? Is Jason Kidd (say) substantially more valuable than Daniel Gibson (say)? Kidd might be slightly better right now (though even that is not a given), but Gibson is so much younger, so much more cap-friendly, and so much more likely to improve over the coming years. Jason Kidd is a lot more famous. I ask you: is that what's important?

Hey guys,

Am I the only one who thinks the Cavs are much better than their record suggests? I mean, look how they've come on in the last month or so. The Cavs are going to go far in the playoffs. I guarantee it.

Julie Davner
East St. Louis, IL

Corey says: You're right, Julie, in that the Cavs have clearly turned things around after an absolutely abysmal start, as evidenced by this season-o-graph (also known as a running point differential) (click to enlarge):



Of course, despite the Cavs' overall winning record, they still haven't climbed up into the black, point differential-wise. And in fact, they're currently in the midst of another mini-setback (probably the result of a sudden spate of injuries). Still, the turnaround is pretty obvious; it began sometime around the Cavs' December 25 win over the Heats (or "Heat"). I decided to try breaking up the season so far into two periods: Games 1-28 (or "Initial Plunge") and Games 29-52 (or "New Hotness," to borrow a phrase), in order to track the changes in the Cavs' offensive and defensive performance.

First the offense:

           Initial Plunge   New Hotness
Off. Eff.      103.2           108.4
eFG%            .478            .483
TO rate         .159            .142
Reb. rate       .280            .314
FT/FGA          .223            .220

By slightly improving their shooting efficiency, turnover rate, and offensive rebounding, the Cavs have been able to significantly improve their offensive efficiency. Would it surprise you to learn that the team also slowed its pace factor (from 92.0 during the Initial Plunge to 89.8 during New Hotness)?

Next, the defense:

           Initial Plunge   New Hotness
Def. Eff.      108.3           104.8
eFG% allowed    .502            .496
TO rate         .147            .146
Reb. rate       .751            .763
FT/FGA allowed  .269            .223

The defensive improvement has been slightly less dramatic, and even during New Hotness, the Cavs are still nowhere near their defensive awesomeness from last season (101.3 in the regular season, 100.9 overall). Nonetheless, the Cavs have cut down on their opponents' shooting, rebounding, and foul shooting (some of that is that the Cavs' opponents are shooting lower free throw percentages, but some of it is that the Cavs are committing fewer fouls).

The 2007-08 has been a weird season so far. I'd say there are factors causing some people to overrate the Cavs, and other factors causing people to underrate them. If New Hotness continues over the rest of the season, the Cavs will be fine and your prediction will probably look pretty good, Julie. But the last seven games have seen the Cavs start to lose it again. Let's hope it's just the injuries.

Dear Mistake on the Sports,

I heard you guys are into word games or something. I've been wondering for a long time if there are any good anagrams to be made from the names of our Cavaliers. All I've been able to get is "I Know Berm" for Mike Brown. It's pretty weak, I know. Can you help me out?

Lanie Burx
Etched Vegan Hills, OH

Alex says: I'll try my best!

Any investigation into Cavaliers-related anagrams should surely start with LeBron James, Our Lord and Savior. Tired of saying "King James this," "King James that"? Well, next time, try "Elmer Banjos this," "Elmer Banjos that." I imagine Mr. Banjos as some kind of banjo-playing, mountain-man LeBron alter ego. And if we're going to discuss alter egos, what about Daniel Gibson's nom de plume, Linda Big Nose?

Anagrams don't just reveal a person's secret identity, though. They can unveil lurid tidbits. Take, for example, Drew Gooden. Ever wonder what kind of car Drew drives? Wonder no more! He's a Dodge owner. And with a mantra like "Score, win," we now know why Eric Snow drives the lane with such authority. Damon Jones clearly has a penchant for outside shooting, likely since he does non-jam—which is probably the reason he never dunks. And when he comes back from injury, keep an eye on Aleksandar Pavlovic. Insiders are saying he's nothing more than the Cavaliers' vodka plan.

What if we turn our attention away from the men on the court? At the announcers table, Fred McLeod, hastily brought over from Detroit, is a forced meld. Austin Carr, though, is just suffering from crania rust. The man that hired McLeod away from the Pistons, Dan Gilbert, may have thought twice about buying the Cavaliers back in 2005 if he knew that he wouldn't be raising a championship banner in Quicken Loans Arena any time soon. How do I know? Let's just say that purchasing the team might have resulted in a tabled ring.

And finally, much-maligned guard Larry Hughes only hurls long twos.

MBTL Times,

Speaking of Larry Hughes, he sucks. He's got to be the most inefficient shooter in the league, right?

Francis B.
Fond du Lac, WI

Alex says: I'm with you, Francis. But actually, Hughes is currently the fourth-most-inefficient shooter among qualified players, leading Sebastian Telfair, Quentin Richardson, Sasha Pavlovic, and Ben Wallace. For the uninitiated, I'm using effective field goal percentage (eFG%) as the measure of shooting efficiency, since it adjusts for the added reward of making a three rather than a two.

But not everything Hughes has been lousy this season. His eFG% on three-pointers alone (52.2) would place in him the upper half of the league standings. His eFG% on long twos (38.6), though, would only place him above Ben Wallace. How could Hughes actually improve by stepping behind the three-point line? Actually, he makes a higher percentage of his long twos versus threes (38.5% to 34.7%). It's just the bonus of making a three pushes the efficiency of his three-point shooting past that of his long-two shooting.

And how do I know all these numbers? I made a super cool spreadsheet, of course. In a previous post, I wrote about mining shot chart data from NBA.com. Well, I've scaled up a few degrees. I'm now tracking the shots of every Cavalier automatically for the rest of the season. I even went through the trouble to produce some charts, which I won't bother to discuss:







Don't mind the horizontal scale going above 100% on that last one. For all of its bells and whistles, Google Spreadsheets won't let you mess with the axes. Anyway, remember what I said about Larry Hughes sucking at long twos? Unfortunately, Hughes shoots the highest percentage of his shots from this distance of any Cavalier. Of course, things aren't as simple as telling Hughes to stop shooting long twos and maybe, just maybe, taking one step backwards and trying from there. But it couldn't hurt.

Dear Lake Sporting Mistakes,

Who's the second-best Cavalier?

Linda B.
Independence, OH

Alex says: Linda, hello. Thanks for coming. Let's get right to it. You may recall, ten seconds ago I sent you a link to my super cool Cavs spreadsheet. Though it only contains shooting data, I think it'll make for a useful first pass through the possible answers. Your question could have a few interpretations, so I'm going to answer "Who's been the second-best Cavalier this season?" Now, this player definitely should be a good shooter. So I used season eFG% (which is graphed above) to eliminate the losers, leaving Daniel Gibson, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Damon Jones, Dwayne Jones, Ira Newble, and Anderson Varejão.

Right away, it's not too hard to eliminate a few more. Neither Jones, Newble, and Varejão has played enough minutes to merit consideration. So we're down to Gibson and Ilgauskas—it's hard to find two more dissimilar Cavaliers. Gibson has been the more efficient scorer and passer. Ilgauskas is better on defense and rebounding. Though Ilgauskas either has the advantage or trails closely in most per-thirty-six-minute stats. To wit (from Basketball-Reference.com):

            2P   2PA   3P  3PA   FT  FTA
Ilgauskas  6.3  13.4  0.0  0.0  3.2  3.9
   Gibson  1.9   4.1  2.5  5.4  1.7  2.1

           ORB  DRB  AST  STL  BLK   TO   PTS
Ilgauskas  4.3  6.9  1.8  0.5  1.9  2.2  15.9
   Gibson  0.6  2.1  2.9  1.0  0.3  1.6  12.9

As much as I love Gibson and totally intended to write this section about how he's been the second-best Cavalier so far, Z has actually edged him out by a hair, in my book. Ilgauskas has scored efficiently, grabbed rebounds, and blocked shots. Gibson has only been an unbelievable shooter. That's fine, though. He still rocks hardcore—an eFG% near 60, are you kidding me?

Dear Alex and Corey,

When will the Mistake by the Lake Sporting Times be announcing its endorsements in the presidential primaries? I need to send in my absentee ballot, like, soon... and you guys are leaving me hanging.

Chad
Clam Gulch, AK

Corey says: Okay, okay. I gotta tell you, Chad is hardly the only person to have written us about this. We've put off an announcement for long enough. After weeks of intense discussion, research, and personally interviewing each candidate, Alex and I are prepared to announce that the Mistake by the Lake Sporting Times is officially endorsing [PORTIONS OF THIS ANSWER ARE BEING CENSORED BY THE MISTAKE BY THE LAKE SPORTING TIMES'S PARENT COMPANY, GLOBOCLEVE MEDIA, INC.] for President of the United States of America. We feel very strongly that with his or her fresh perspective and/or wealth of experience, America will be in the right hands.

Well, that pretty much seals it. Better luck next time, other candidates!