Inspired by Corey's latest post, I decided to graph the career scoring trajectory of the best scorers in N.B.A. history, some other notables, and LeBron. I wanted to see whether Corey was right when he wrote, "it's extremely likely He's going to be competing for the all-time scoring record."

I made a chart so large that I'm only going to link it, rather than post it here. But you really should look at it. (You can also take a look at the whole spreadsheet.) Read it like so: each player's career scoring total is presented as a line, with age on the horizontal axis. For players that have retired, their line just becomes horizontal. For active players, the line stops abruptly, since they'll continue to accumulate points in the coming years. And I apologize for the lines being of so many similar colors; I wanted to maximize the number of available comparisons.

With the chart, we can inspect how LeBron compares to the scoring pace set by, say, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. It turns out that LeBron is outdoing everybody else, by a good margin too. He hasn't scored the most points per season—just check out the slope of Wilt Chamberlain's line between twenty two and twenty seven—but LeBron can thank His age for the head start. Had Abdul-Jabbar or Chamberlain been able to play in the N.B.A. directly after high school, LeBron wouldn't seem such a good bet to break records anymore. And speaking of age, Kobe Bryant is usually mentioned as someone who'll get to Abdul-Jabbar's record before LeBron, since he too has had the advantage of playing professionally at eighteen. I'm not convinced by this argument. LeBron has already completely outpaced Bryant, thanks to Bryant's pedestrian first two seasons.

The hidden assumption in all this is that not only will LeBron stay healthy for the next twenty or so seasons, but that He'll remain interested in playing professionally. Plenty of great players have retired relatively young, and not necessarily due to injuries: Chamberlain, Oscar Robertson, Bob Pettit to name a few. If one of them had played until his forties, LeBron might have a tougher path in front of Him. Not that He's not up to it.

So, LeBron is now the Cavaliers franchise scoring leader, as you know, and there is much rejoicing amongst the Brothers Rubin, as you might expect. During Friday's game, there was much talk about this historic event—and while I'm not here to diminish the achievement in any way shape or form, I got to wondering how much time it might have taken our Lord and Savior to break the franchise scoring record if, you know, the Cavs were a decent franchise, instead of, you know, a lousy one for all but a few interesting seasons.

Here were the 30 NBA franchise scoring records as of the beginning of Friday night's game:

UTA  Karl Malone       36,374
CHI  Michael Jordan    29,277
HOU  Hakeem Olajuwon   26,511
BOS  John Havlicek     26,395
IND  Reggie Miller     25,279
LAL  Jerry West        25,192
NYK  Patrick Ewing     23,665
SAS  George Gervin     23,602
ATL  Dominique Wilkins 23,292
SAC  Oscar Robertson   22,009
DEN  Alex English      21,645
PHI  Hal Greer         21,586
MIN  Kevin Garnett     19,041
DET  Isiah Thomas      18,822
SEA  Gary Payton       18,207
POR  Clyde Drexler     18,040
GSW  Wilt Chamberlain  17,783
DAL  Dirk Nowitzki     16,787
PHO  Walter Davis      15,666
WAS  Elvin Hayes       15,551
MIL  K. Abdul-Jabbar   14,211
LAC  Randy Smith       12,735
ORL  Nick Anderson     10,650
NJN  Buck Williams     10,440
CLE  Brad Daugherty    10,389
NOH  Dell Curry         9,839
MIA  Alonzo Mourning    9,459
TOR  Vince Carter       9,420
MEM  Pau Gasol          8,966
CHA  Gerald Wallace     3,994

As you can see, the Cavaliers scoring record is one of the more pathetic scoring records out there. Brad Daugherty was a great player, of course, but he played for a relatively short period of time.

What I'm saying is, as LeBron continues His glorious career, the Cavs franchise scoring record is going to grow plump and robust, climbing those rankings until the Walter Davises and the Clyde Drexlers of the world are but tiny specks in LeBron's rear-view mirror.

Let's (conservatively) estimate that LeBron scores about 2,100 points per season from now until His triumphant retirement. And let's agree that LeBron will be a Cavalier forever (or, at the very least, that His points scored will count toward the Cavaliers franchise scoring record no matter who signs His paychecks). Here's how I see things shaping up:

• At the end of the current season, LeBron has scored about 10,967 points in His career, catapulting Himself above the Nets' false idol Buck Williams and Orlando's pretender Nick Anderson.
• In three more years, LeBron has accumulated about 17,267 points, surpassing the likes of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (as a Buck, not as a Laker) and Elvin Hayes (as a Bullet).
• After three more years, LeBron is 30 years old (ie: still very much in His prime) and has racked up about 23,567 points, moving him into George Gervin/Patrick Ewing territory.
• In the year 2020, as a 36-year old 12-time MVP, LeBron establishes the Cavaliers franchise scoring record as the greatest franchise scoring record of them all, surpassing Karl Malone as He scores His 36,375th point.
• Two years later, despite the NBA's host of rule changes aimed at containing LeBron's uncontainable style of play, LeBron reaches 38,388 career points, becoming the all-time NBA scoring leader (over Kareem Abdul-Jabbar).
• In the year 2034, LeBron takes mercy on the NBA and agrees to retire after celebrating His 50th birthday, having scored an even 65,000 points, grabbed a record 30,544 rebounds, and dished a mind-boggling 24,677 assists.

Okay, so maybe I got a little carried away at the end there, but as I said, my assumption of 2,100 points per season is quite conservative. If LeBron plays until the age of 36 or 37, it's extremely likely He's going to be competing for the all-time scoring record.

Spring Training statistics are almost completely useless. Though in sabermetric circles, the same study is trot out every March: John Dewan found that "a hitter with a positive difference between their Spring Training slugging percentage and their lifetime slugging percentage of .200 or more alerts us to a step forward in the coming season." Technically speaking, there's a positive correlation there.

You can see where I'm going. Without further ado, here are the Indians (with thirty or more at bats) whose current Spring Training slugging percentage exceed his career percentage by more than two hundred points.

Player          AB   SLG   Car  Diff
Jason Michaels  34  .676  .418  .258
Andy Gonzalez   31  .677  .249  .428

Unfortunately, it looks as though Gonzalez won't break with the big league club at the end of the month. He'll have to squander his super breakout in Buffalo. As for Michaels, returned to his natural state as a platoon outfielder, it's reasonable to expect better things of him in 2008. His spring has bode well so far.

There were actually a couple other interesting players who didn't qualify for the first list, either for lack of at bats or a too-small difference in slugging percentages.

Player          AB    SLG   Car  Diff
Andy Marte      41   .537  .356  .181  
Grady Sizemore  26  1.115  .488  .627

Holy crap, look at Grady Sizemore! If I were a betting man, I'd bet everything I own on Sizemore winning the M.V.P.; it's a mortal lock. Seriously though, that's pretty amazing. Marte is having a nice spring himself, too. Though the progression of comments on his PECOTA card makes me want to cry, that's something to hang his hat on.

So, in conclusion, Jason Michaels: meh, but maybe better. And Grady Sizemore? YES! YES! YES!

The Cavs have played 11 games since Wallace, Szczerbiak, West and Smith first donned their wine 'n' golds. Is that enough of a sample size for us to start drawing conclusions about the current roster, vis-à-vis the previous one? Heck no! But we haven't posted anything in a while, and I don't have any better ideas, so let's just do a real basic comparison. I won't tell if you don't.

We'll call the first 54 games "Roster A" and the last 11 games "Roster B". Note that this means the February 22 game against the Wizards (the one where only 8 guys suited up, and Eric Snow played 32 agonizing minutes) doesn't fall into either category.

First, a look at the offense:

                Roster A   Roster B
Efficiency        105.4      111.0
Opp.-adjusted     105.6      110.9
eFG%              .480       .500
TO rate           .151       .150
Reb. rate         .293       .319
FT/FGA            .221       .238

Wow, that's a big difference. I mean, if we were drawing conclusions—and of course, we aren't—we might say that, despite the fears of many, the addition of Ben Wallace has had no negative affect on the offense whatsoever (even with Zydrunas Ilgauskas injured for much of the time in question). Once again, if we were drawing conclusions—and of course, we aren't—we might suppose that the offensive suckitude of Larry Hughes outweighs that of Wallace. Or that Szczerbiak and company are just that good. We'll have to check in on these data again at the end of the season, of course, because an offensive efficiency of 111.0 is just so much better than anything the Cavs have managed in the last few years—I would expect to see a little regression to the mean.

And how 'bout that defense?

                Roster A   Roster B
Efficiency        106.5      107.0
Opp.-adjusted     106.3      107.7
eFG% allowed      .498       .492
TO rate           .146       .146
Reb. rate         .759       .731
FT/FGA allowed    .248       .239

The defensive bottom line does not appear to have changed much. The "opposition-adjusted" stats do suggest the defense has fallen off ever so slightly, but even then, not by much. What I find interesting is that, while the Cavs have actually gotten better at containing their opponents' shooting (ironic when you consider the personnel that have been switched), their defensive rebounding has taken a hit. If we were drawing conclusions—and of course, we aren't—we might wonder whether Drew Gooden's superior rebounding was more valuable than people realized.

All things considered, the 11-games of post-trade performance do suggest the team has gotten better. The numbers are quite volatile, however, not only because we're talking about small sample sizes on both sides of the equation, but because, at various times both pre- and post-trade, the Cavaliers have had major contributors sidelined for long periods of time by injury. So take this analysis with a grain of salt.

In the transaction flurry following the start of the N.F.L. free agent period, the Browns have made three moves: resigning Derek Anderson, trading for Corey Williams, and trading for Shaun Rogers. I'm going to write about the last of these. For the sake of exposition, the Lions were originally going to trade Rogers to the Bengals for a third- and fifth-round pick. The league put the kibosh on that deal due to"language issues in the trade agreement," according to ESPN.com. So, the Browns swooped in, offering a third-rounder and Leigh Bodden for Rogers. The Lions quickly accepted and that's where we are now.

The Bengals' third-round pick is the seventy-seventh overall, for a standard draft value of 205. The Bengals' fifth-round pick is the one-hundred-forty-first, for a value of 35.5. The Browns' third-round pick is the eighty-seventh overall, valued at 155. So, from the Lions' perspective, they would've received 240.5 points in draft value from the Bengals and 155 and Leigh Bodden from the Browns. That they were willing to make both trades suggests that Leigh Bodden was valued at 85.5 points (the difference between 240.5 and 155), or an early-fourth-rounder.

Excuse me? Leigh Bodden is worth an early-fourth-round pick? What the hell is this? Regular readers should know that Corey and I have been Passengers #1 and #1A of the Leigh Bodden Bandwagon since 2004. And it's not just us. For example, here's a quote from Pro Football Prospectus 2007:

At Pro Football Prospectus, we absolutely love Leigh Bodden. Cleveland's DVOA against number-one receivers indicates that he's great. Our game charting numbers indicate that he's great. Our own subjective viewings of the Browns indicate that he's great.

It's hard to explain the Browns valuing a player so loved by the leading football authority on the web as a fourth-round pick. Tony Grossi writes that they gave up on "a rags-to-riches player who some in the organization felt slipped measurably last season." If that's the case, the Browns made a terribly stupid decision. They had a player who was widely considered one of the best in the league. He's young; he's affordable. Then he had a bad season—not terrible—but worse than they'd expected. Should they then trade him, when his value is at it's lowest? Of course not!

It's possible the Browns have an insight that Bodden has become irrevocably worse and is actually worth only a fourth-rounder now. I find that highly implausible, considering that he played pretty well at the end of the season. There can't be some injury the Browns are hiding—that'd be trading in bad faith. And if Bodden stunk on the field last season, surely the Lions' scouts would've kept the team from trading for him.

All this is pretty one-sided, though. P.F.P. has nice things to say about Shaun Rogers too, but they're not even close to the praise that rains upon Bodden. Rogers is very good and fills a serious need for the Browns, but doesn't the trade now make cornerback a need, too? Would you be willing to hand a starting job to Brandon McDonald with such a small body of work? Frankly, I don't think Rogers is in as high a percentile of defensive linemen that Bodden is in of defensive backs. The Lions probably got the better player. Though, even if that's not the case, the Browns got fleeced.