As a NFLPA-certified Draftnik, I couldn't have been more excited by this year's NFL Draft. Especially when it came to who the Browns should select. Most everyone thought that they should take the athletic guy with short hair, but I knew all along—no way, José—they should take the strong guy with the tattoo: he projects better to the pro game. That's what the amateurs always forget, projection to the pro game.

In the end, was it any surprise the Browns picked the strong guy? Alex Mack is a special player with special abilities. Though, I still have some reservations, and I doubt I'm the first to point this out, but sparking and becoming a puddle are much less valuable on the offensive line than, say, as a linebacker. Might a position change be in store?

As for the best picks of Day 1, that would have to be Atlanta getting Peria Jerry, Carolina stealing Everette Brown in the second round, Indianapolis nabbing Fili Moala, and obviously, Tennessee grabbing Sen'Derrick Marks. There are still plenty of sleeper picks to be had on Day 2, though. Look out for when Al Afalava of Oregon, Ell Ash of Houston, Ramarcus Brown of Georgia, Endor Cooper of Howard, Ataefiok Etukeren of Georgetown, Mesphin Forrester of Washington, Tupo Fuaau of Washington State, Dre'Mail Hardin of Stillman, Jorvorskie Lane of Texas A&M, Chantz McClinic of Wake Forest, Brouce Mompremier of South Florida, Captain Munnerlyn of South Carolina, Wopamo Osaisai of Stanford, Everette Pedescleaux of Northern Iowa, SirVincent Rogers of Houston, Rodgeriqus Smith of Auburn, Stryker Sulak of Missouri, Swayze Waters of UAB, and Zeek Zacharie of Louisiana-Monroe are drafted. Getting any one of those players on Day 2 is a draft well done.

And finally, it pains me that the Ravens drafted Michael Oher, an offensive tackle out of Ole Miss. You may remember Oher as the main subject of The Blind Side: Evolution of a Game, a for-real book I once read. I wished the Browns would pick him up, since he came across as an amazing prospect and person in the book. Barring that, I wanted anyone but the Ravens and their horribly ineffective amateur scouting to grab him, but of course, it wasn't to be. And to respond to the inevitable critics, sure, Blind Side isn't as good as Moneyball, but you can't blame Oher, with his background, for not being as good a writer as Billy Beane. That's just ridiculous.

Three posts in five days—what is this, 2004?

As we endure the interminable march toward meaningful Cavaliers playoff games, but before we get too far removed from the regular season, I wanted to make a couple of points about that regular season, and what it suggests about the 2009 Cavs' place in history. Plus, I needed an excuse to run more Cavs graphs, as required by my contract.

To begin, here is a running point differential for the Cavs' 2009 regular season (click to enlarge):



The line is nice and steep, and relatively smooth, to boot. But still, that's not a very interesting graph to look at without a little context. Here's one displaying a running point differential for every Cavs team since 2004 (i.e., every LeBron team):



There we go. Talk about unprecedented. The turquoise line represents the 2007 season, when the Cavs made the Finals, but even that one doesn't come close. Meanwhile, the depressing yellow line represents last season—talk about improvement!

Okay, now here's one showing the Cavs alongside the other so-called "elite" teams of 2009 (Boston, L.A., and Orlando):



As you can see, the Celtics had a couple of chances to challenge the balance of power, but the Cavs have mostly been the obvious #1 since November.

The big question, of course, is how the 2009 Cavs rank among the best teams of all time. You may recall my December post pointing out that they were, at the time, the best team ever. And while the Cavs didn't manage to hold on to that particular title, they did finish as the 5th-best team of all team, by Pythagorean win percentage:

                 Pyth. W%
1. 1996 Bulls      .850
2. 1997 Bulls      .824
3. 2008 Celtics    .818
4. 1992 Bulls      .801
5. 2009 Cavaliers  .787
6. 1999 Spurs      .782
7. 1994 Sonics     .778
8. 2007 Spurs      .778
9. 1997 Jazz       .777
10. 2000 Lakers    .776

Here's a graph showing these 10 teams' running point differentials. The 2009 Cavs' rather slow pace factor hurts them a little in the area of point differential, which is a cumulative stat; nonetheless, here you go:



Admittedly, that graph is a little busy, and the Cavs' maroon line can be hard to track, but you can still see how they leveled off a little, relative to the competition, at around game #36.

That leaves just one final question: are the 2009 Cavs at least the best home team of all time? I'm afraid the answer is still no:

                 Home Pyth. W%
1. 1996 Bulls        .920
2. 1997 Bulls        .899
3. 2009 Cavaliers    .892
4. 1971 Bucks        .892
5. 1972 Bucks        .886
6. 1999 Spurs        .882
7. 1989 Cavaliers    .881
8. 2002 Kings        .880
9. 1996 Sonics       .880
10. 2008 Jazz        .879

The Cavs may have nearly tied the mark for best home won-lost record, but in terms of all-time home Pythagorean record, the Cavs finish 3rd. You'll notice that the 1986 Celtics, whose 40-1 home record the Cavs were chasing, aren't even in the all-time top ten. In fact, the '86 Celts rank an astonishing 40th among all home teams ever, with a Pythagorean win percentage of .837. They're only the 3rd-best home team in Celtics history. Meanwhile, the 1989 Cavaliers are also in the top ten.

However you slice it, the Cavs are historically good. Of the all-time top ten in Pythagorean win percentage, eight won the NBA championship, while a ninth had the misfortune of facing the '97 Bulls in the Finals. (The '94 Sonics, on the other hand, lost to an 8th seed in the first round, in what has got to be the worst playoff choke in NBA history.) Of course, the 2009 Cavs may have to face tougher playoff competition than those other eight teams did. The lesson, I suppose, is that there are no sure things—only really solid things with good odds for success. Personally, I like the Cavaliers' chances to win the championship this year. By that, I mean that their chances are higher than any other team's—we're talking somewhere in the 40% range, instead of the 25-30% range usually earned by the #1 overall seed. My point is, there's still a 60% (or so) chance that the Cavs don't win it all—but even if they don't, it wouldn't change the fact that they are (and likely always will remain) one of the best teams ever to play in the NBA.

I have not been to an Indians game yet this year, but loyal reader Mike was kind enough to send us a link to this article about a shocking new-for-2009 development at Progressive Field. Long story short, you can now buy "Ketchup Cheats" T-shirts at the Indians team shop. This comes as a surprise, to say the least, and at first I wasn't quite sure how to react to it.

In case you're new around here, my history with Ketchup is both long and ugly. As far as I know, I was the first person to accuse Ketchup of cheating (in the then-Jacobs Field Hot Dog Race) when I wrote this post in June 2005. Exposing injustice within the Hot Dog Race, railing against the insidious and seemingly all-powerful Evil Pittsburgh Ketchup Lobby (or EPKL), and supporting Mustard—one of the great heroes of Cleveland history—quickly became running themes on our blog. Later, some astute and noble Indians fans started the now-famous website KetchupCheats.com (for which I voiced my undying support) and also began selling "Ketchup Cheats" T-shirts. Finally, in August 2008, I announced the beginning of a Cleveland-wide ketchup boycott—a defiant operation that came to include ones upon ones of loyal Clevelanders.

Anyway, the Indians must have gotten wind of this rising tide of populist anger, and decided to try and turn it to their advantage. Here are pictures of the original "Ketchup Cheats" T-shirt (on the left) and the insultingly similar new rip-off (on the right):



So what are we supposed to make of the fact that the Indians themselves are selling these shirts? Do they like Ketchup or don't they? Do they want him to continue cheating, or don't they? Do they even realize that they are the ruling authority on all matters Hot Dog Race? By my reasoning, it's like this:

1. The existence of these shirts proves that the Indians organization not only is aware of the cheating, but acknowledges that such behavior is, in fact, cheating.
2. Cheating is wrong.
3. Legally, it is fully within the power of the Indians organization to put an end to the cheating, either by penalizing, replacing, or banning Ketchup. More on this later.
4. They would not be selling the T-shirts at all if they had any intention of stopping the cheating any time soon. Ergo...
5. The Indians organization openly supports the cheating... which is another way of saying that the Indians share Big Ketchup's agenda. Ergo...
6. The EPKL has infiltrated itself all the way to the top—the Cleveland Indians. In other words, this conspiracy now runs deeper than we feared, even in our wildest nightmares.

The shirts may appear to have an anti-Ketchup slogan on them, but you can't be anti-Ketchup while openly condoning Ketchup's heinous cheating on a daily basis. And you can no longer play dumb—that is, claim to be blissfully unaware of the cheating—once you start selling "Ketchup Cheats" merchandise. No, I'm afraid the Indians are deep in a moral quagmire that's not going to be easy to escape.

That leaves us to ponder: what should a true Clevelander—i.e., one who wants to continue calling attention to Ketchup's cheating, and who wants to continue attending games at Progressive Field as a way of pledging support for noble Mustard, and who may even want to continue rooting for the baseball arm of the Indians organization (oh yeah, forgot about them)—do? On this question, I am firmly with Vince Grzegorek, author of the Cleveland Scene article linked above, who urges fans to continue buying their "Ketchup Cheats" shirts from the grassroots online store, and not from the Indians team shop.

Now, my brother suggests a better way for the Indians to get in on the Hot Dog Race T-shirt racket: sell pro-Mustard shirts instead of anti-Ketchup ones. (Alex's proposed slogan: "Mustard Stands for Truth and Reason.") But it's the whole question of what the Indians should do that bugs me. They should simply put an end to the cheating. Instead, they're obviously determined to condone or even encourage the cheating, so even if they did change the slogans on the shirts, that would still be the situation.

Alex has another theory; namely, that the Indians brass are not the bad guys here, but simply the unfortunate ballpark operators being forced to conduct business within the totalitarian regime of a fascist condiment lobby. In Alex's version, the Indians are like Bunny Colvin or Felix Gaeta, trying to do what they can in an unjust world (that is, selling anti-Ketchup shirts; "aiding the resistance," so to speak) without upsetting the balance of power so much that they get crushed by The Man (in other words, still letting Ketchup cheat his way to title after title).

Still, EPKL coercion or not, I find the actions of the Indians organization to be too incongruous for comfort. Okay, so this may not be the equivalent of the Chinese government selling "Free Tibet" bumper stickers after discovering how well they're selling over in the West. But even in Alex's scenario, we've got... let's say, the provincial government of Tibet... selling "Free Tibet" schwag. Besides, if the EPKL is dictating Progressive Field policy at all—either Hot Dog Race-related or merchandise-related—then I have a hard time buying that they wouldn't put the kibosh on "Ketchup Cheats" T-shirt sales almost immediately. In other words, I think the EPKL almost has to be behind the new T-shirt promotion. They are insidious, indeed.

In conclusion, keep fighting the power, Cleveland. Buy your T-shirts from this website. Boo Ketchup's illegally-won victories. Keep boycotting ketchup products (especially Heinz ketchup) throughout the Cleveland area (in fact, we're now raising the Ketchup Boycott Alert Level to spicy brown). And most of all, support Mustard, because he represents our future, and therefore our greatest hope for survival.

Meine Damen und Herren,

The end of the regular season has been a long time coming, but it's finally pancake time at The Q! Okay, so this first series is more like the amuse-bouche before the pancakes. But still—let us preview!

As we usually do for our Super Preview Extravaganzae, I'll run down each of the four factors twice (once for offense and once for defense), to try and paint a picture of how these teams' strengths and weaknesses align.

When the Cavs are on offense

The Cavs have the NBA's 4th-best offense, having scored 112.4 points per 100 possessions, whereas the Pistons have the NBA's 16th-best defense, having allowed 108.0 points per 100 possessions. Let's check the four factors:

1. Shooting

             eFG%    NBA rank
   Cavs      .519        4
   Pistons   .485        6

   This—the most important of the factors—is the bread and butter of both the Cavs offense and the Pistons defense. The Cavs' most efficient shooters are Mo Williams (.548 eFG%), Anderson Varejão (.536—surprise!), Wally Szczerbiak (.536), and LeBron (.530). Their highest-volume shooters have been LeBron (25.0% of team FGA), Mo (17.4%), and Z (11.2%). The Cavs' least efficient shooters (among the guys who get regular minutes, anyway) are Ben Wallace (.445 eFG%), Z (.483), and Boobie Gibson (.493). Meanwhile, Detroit has been among the best at forcing inefficient shots, so while the Cavs still hold an edge here, they'll probably have to leverage some other skills to realize their full advantage on the offensive end. Which brings us to...
   
   
2. Turnovers

              TO%    NBA rank
   Cavs      .125        6
   Pistons   .117       29

   Here we go. The once-vaunted Pistons defense now can't buy a turnover. The Cavs will get their money's worth (i.e. attempting at least one shot) on just about every possession, especially since they're among the best at not coughing it up. The least turnover-prone Cavaliers are Joe Smith (7.3 TO%), Gibson (9.7%), and Z (10.1%).
   
   
3. Rebounding

            OReb%    NBA rank
   Cavs      .277       13
   Pistons   .260       12

   Though the Cavs are no slouches on the offensive glass, the Pistons hold an edge here. Detroit's best defensive rebounders are Antonio McDyess (27.2 DReb%), Rasheed Wallace (24.6%), and Kwame Brown (24.0%). The Cavs' best offensive rebounders are Ben Wallace (12.8 OReb%), Z (11.0%), and Joe Smith (10.8%). Contrary to popular belief, this is not Anderson Varejão's strong suit (8.9%, to rank 6th on the team)—Andy does collect some offensive boards that other players might not even try for, but not often enough to completely forgive his relative lack of more "conventional" offensive rebounds.
   
   
4. Getting to the foul line & foul shooting

           FTA/FGA   NBA rank     FT%    NBA rank
   Cavs      .312       12       .757       21
   Pistons   .320       19         --       --

   Traditionally, the stat for measuring this final factor is FTM/FGA, but that has always bugged me. Sure, it combines two different skills—getting to the foul line in the first place, and making one's free throws—into one handy metric, but it has the potential to mislead (as was the case last season, when the Cavs got to the line a lot but couldn't convert on their FT opportunities). Besides, what do I care how well Pistons opponents shot from the line in 2009? I only care how often the Pistons committed fouls resulting in FT opportunities. So I'm going with FTA/FGA—which tells us that the Cavs are above average at earning their way to the stripe, while the Pistons defense is below average at avoiding fouls—in addition to plain old FT%, in which the Cavs are (still) below average (though better than last year). LeBron James, of course, is the Cavalier most likely to earn a trip to line (9.0 FTA per 36 minutes); His FT%, however, is a merely human .780. The most efficient free thrower on the team, of course, is Mo Williams (.912).

The Cavs hold slight advantages in factors #1 and #4, while the Pistons hold a slight edge in factor #3. But it's the Cavs' commanding superiority behind door #2 (turnovers) that keeps... whoever is coaching the Pistons these days... up at night. Bear in mind that both of these teams play at a very slow pace. Detroit (86.7 possessions per game) had the 2nd-slowest pace in the NBA this season, while the Cavs (88.7) had the 6th-slowest. So these games may turn out to be rather low-scoring—just don't confuse that for "good defense." The Cavs have an elite offense, and the Pistons defense is nothing special.

When the Cavs are on defense

The Cavs have the NBA's 3rd-best defense, having allowed 102.4 points per 100 possessions, whereas the Pistons have the NBA's 21st-best offense, having scored 107.4 points per 100 possessions. Take it away, factors:

1. Shooting

             eFG%    NBA rank
   Pistons   .483       26
   Cavs      .468        2

   Silly Pistons, you're supposed to shoot the ball into the basket. Oh well; they'll get plenty of shot attempts (thanks to their success at factors #2 and #3), they just won't make many of them. The Pistons' most efficient shooters are bench players Amir Johnson (.595 eFG%), Jason Maxiell (.575), and Kwame Brown (.533). Their worst shooter is actually the high-volume Allen Iverson (.432 eFG%); alas, tragically, Iverson will not play in the series due to a "back injury." It's okay: other than Antonio McDyess, the other Pistons starters all have eFG%s below .500 (the NBA average this season).
   
   
2. Turnovers

              TO%    NBA rank
   Pistons   .117        1
   Cavs      .135       10

   The Cavs do a good job at generating turnovers, but the Pistons are the best in the NBA at holding onto the ball. If the Pistons offense has one thing to try to exploit against the Cavaliers defense, it's getting as many shot attempts as possible. (I should say, "as many shot attempts per possession as possible." As noted above, the Pistons and Cavs play very slow-paced games, so there won't be that many possessions... but you know what I mean.)
   
   
3. Rebounding

            OReb%    NBA rank
   Pistons   .279        7
   Cavs      .254        9

   Speaking of maximizing their shot attempts, the Pistons may be able to leverage a slight offensive rebounding advantage to compliment their aforementioned no-turnovers offense. In many ways, this Pistons offense is set up like the Cavs offenses of 2007 and 2008 (only crappier): they're not the best shooters, but they try to make up for it with volume. Detroit's best offensive glassmen are Maxiell (14.0 OReb%), Johnson (13.1%), and McDyess (11.6%). The Cavs, however, are excellent defensive rebounders themselves. They'll counter with Big Z (21.6 DReb%), Varejão (20.6%), and Ben Wallace (19.7%)—or, if Ben doesn't recover from his injury in time, then LeBron (19.0%).
   
   
4. Getting to the foul line & foul shooting

           FTA/FGA   NBA rank     FT%    NBA rank
   Pistons   .282       23       .751       24
   Cavs      .294       12         --       --

   The Pistons don't get to the line that often, and the Cavs don't foul especially often, either. Without Chauncey Billups, Detroit is also a rather weak free-throwing team.

Like I said, the Pistons will generate volume, in the form of second-chance opportunities and a healthy lack of turnovers, but the bottom line is, they don't convert their opportunities into points. The Cavs, meanwhile, have a truly great defense, designed to shut down just such an offense, by cutting off scoring lanes and frustrating shot attempts. I expect the Pistons to be forced into some undesirable jumpers, not to mention their fair share of dwindling shot clocks.

Gratuitous graphs

In my most recent post (which, I'm ashamed to say, was posted a month ago), I experimented with some bubble graphs, juxtaposing each Cavalier's offensive performance against his defensive performance. Each player is represented by a bubble, which gets bigger the more minutes he plays. Anyway, I thought it might be interesting to see how such a graph would look with both the Cavaliers and their opponents jumbled together. So, as in the previous post, I made two different versions—one using Dean Oliver's O-Rating and D-Rating to measure offense and defense, the other using net offensive and defensive plus/minus ratings. The two sets of statistics offer widely differing outlooks on certain individual players, but the bigger picture remains roughly the same.

First, here is a comparison of all Cavs' and Pistons' O-ratings and D-Ratings (click to enlarge):



Here's the same study, only with offensive and defensive plus/minus (click to enlarge):



What jumps out at me from these graphs? First, mad praises to The Chosen One, our Savior and King. Second, the Pistons appear to have things all backwards. Whereas the Cavs' largest bubbles (i.e. the players getting the most minutes) are also the bubbles closest to the top right corner (i.e. the team's most efficient players), a few of the Pistons' largest bubbles (such as Tayshaun Prince's, Rip Hamilton's, and Rodney Stuckey's) are clustered in the bottom left. Meanwhile, some of Detroit's more top-righterly bubbles (Johnson's, Maxiell's, Brown's) belong to bench players. For that reason, the Pistons might—I said might—be able to pick up some ground during those portions of the game when the second teams come in. To a man, the Cavs' second-teamers rate much better according to O- and D-rating than plus/minus, so who knows, they may still have the Pistons bench overmatched, or they may not.

All in all, this appetizer—I mean series—should be fun to watch. While I am very, very, very disappointed in the Washington Wizards for not holding up their end of the bargain this year (there is nothing like seeing the year-end resignation on DeShawn Stevenson's ass face), I am content to let the once-frightening Pistons be the Cavaliers' new practice squad. Enjoy it, Cavs fans!