CC Sabathia is big and fat

On Tuesday afternoon, I saw "husky" Yankees pitcher CC Sabathia — generously listed at 290 pounds on the Yankees’ official roster — on a television commercial for Subway, whose slogan is "Eat Fresh." 
How ... fitting. 
Are you kidding? 
Wouldn’t it be more appropriate for Sabathia to be hawking desserts for the Cheescake Factory, or slanging double cheeseburgers for McDonald’s? 
BTW, I am a huge CC fan and I think he is going to win the Cy Young this season.

Nike and LBJ

For the people who have been claiming for years that LeBron gets more money from Nike if he plays in New York, Los Angeles or Chicago....You were wrong. Here's the link to Brian Windhorst's story from Cleveland.com:
http://www.cleveland.com/cavs/index.ssf/2010/03/sources_say_lebron_james_new_d.html

Update on some mock draft stuff

Since I completed my mock draft on Sunday, a couple of noteworthy headlines have manifested themselves:
* Oklahoma QB Sam Bradford really turned heads at his pro day, prompting one talent evaluated (longtime Cowboys personnel man Gil Brandt) to say its the best QB workout he'd seen since Troy Aikman.
- What does that mean? The Rams are going to take Bradford first. No question. In fact, I'd suspect they already have a contract worked out prior to draft day in April.
- Oklahoma State WR Dez Bryant also had an eye-opening pro day, and from what I have been reading and hearing, he's now the top WR in the draft. In my mock, I had Bryant going to the Jaguars at No. 10. He may not last that long, as I could see the Raiders grabbing him at No. 8 (yes, I know they took a receiver in the first round last season).
- I wouldn't be surprised to see Florida QB Tim Tebow sneak into the first round. Just saying.
- Another guy that could sneak into the first round is Virginia CB Chris Cook, who I didn't have in my mock draft.

NFL Mock Draft 1.0

As I've said in this space before, I am a big NFL Draft guy. I read all I can about the prospects, watch some video of the top guys, read evaluations and study mock drafts (the reputable ones, done by ESPN people, Don Banks at SI.com and Pat Kirwan at NFL.com). The NFL really makes the draft a big event, and this year the first few picks will even be done in primetime. Pretty cool stuff. In the past, myself and coworker Shaun Hoy have done mock drafts for our newspaper, The Roanoke Times. It's a fun exercise, so I thought I'd do one on my blog. I plan to do more than one, probably three: This one, one two weeks from now and maybe one the day of the draft. Not quite sure yet. Anyway, here's my first mock draft. Enjoy:

1. St. Louis Rams
Sam Bradford, QB, Oklahoma
- Looks like this is starting to take shape as a real possibility. This is pretty elementary -- the Rams need a quarterback and a face of the franchise, plain and simple. Bradford provides both. If I were the Rams I would entertain any offers for trading down, as they have many gaping holes to fill. But the chances of any team wanting to move up to the top spot are slim ... and probably none.

2. Detroit Lions
Ndamakong Suh, DT, Nebraska
- Suh is the guy that was the early favorite to go No.1 overall. But as the Rams are smitten with Bradford, that leaves Suh to fall into the Lions' lap. And I'm sure they are just fine with it, as Jim Schwartz gets a mammoth he can plug into his 3-4 defense. When Schwartz was the defensive coordinator of the Titans, he had Albert Haynesworth in that role. That had some success, last time I checked. Suh is a very disruptive force and I see him having an immediate impact.

3. Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Gerald McCoy, DT, Oklahoma
- The Bucs need an anchor for their 4-3 defense so this is my best guess as well as the best guess of the experts I read. McCoy is the clear No. 2 defensive lineman in the draft, behind Suh, and will probably become a premier pass rusher. Also, the Bucs have two second-round picks, so they could be active in the trade game on draft day. I will offer this counter opinion: Here are the Bucs' starting tackles: Jeremy Trueblood (RT) and Donald Penn (LT). Those names don't blow me away, so how about Russell Okung from Oklahoma State, a 6-6, 305 pound bookend tackle?

4. Washington Redskins
Jimmy Clausen, QB, Notre Dame
- The smart pick is Okung, the offensive tackle. But this is the Redskins, and owner Dan Snyder always wants to make headlines. It makes some sense, as new coach Mike Shanahan probably wants to install a new quarterback and move past the mediocrity that is Jason Cambell. Clausen has played on the big stage and ran an NFL-style offense in college. The tricky part is there will be quarterbacks just as good as Clausen available in the second round, or later (Colt McCoy). But its the Redskins, no offense to their fans.

5. Kansas City Chiefs
Russell Okung, OT, Oklahoma State
- The Chiefs are another team that has many, many holes to fill, but in this scenario the best offensive lineman in the draft just fell into their lap. Yes, they just recently drafted Branden Albert to play left tackle, but they can slide him over to the right side, or put Okung there. GM Scott Pioli is too smart to pass this opportunity up.

6. Seattle Seahawks
C.J. Spiller, RB, Clemson
- This is hard one to gauge, as the Seahawks need help everywhere and have two first-round picks (6 and 14). So any number of possible trades could happen here. If not, here are two quick reasons why the Spiller makes sense: 1. Seattle needs a running back and a playmaker and Spiller is the best one out there and can do everything (run, catch, return). 2. Pat Kirwin of NFL.com is very close to Carroll and this is his guess as well...very credible source.

7. Cleveland Browns
Eric Berry, S, Tennessee
- A dream scenario for myself and Browns fans. Secondary is the weakest spot on the Browns roster and Berry is a safety in the mold of Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu. A game-changer ... big hits, good in coverage, fast and smart. If Seattle bites and takes Berry at No. 6, I'd say the Browns take Florida CB Joe Haden or trade down out of this spot.

8. Oakland Raiders
Bryan Bulaga, OT, Iowa
- The pick almost impossible to predict. Let's rewind to 2009 for a second: How many mock drafts had the Raiders selecting WR Darius Heyward-Bey with their first-round pick? I'd say zero. Back to 2010: My guess is the Raiders take the best offensive lineman available, and here it's Bulaga (6-6, 312). Other possibilities include Anthony Davis (Rutgers), Bruce Campbell (Maryland) and Trent Williams (Oklahoma).

9. Buffalo Bills
Trent Williams, OT, Oklahoma
- It gets hairy here, as Clausen would be the ideal fit for a team needing a fresh start at QB. But in this mock draft, Clausen is gone so the Bills have to go in another direction. I'd guess offensive line, which leaves Williams as the best available option according to the rankings I've seen.

10. Jacksonville Jaguars
Dez Bryant, WR, Oklahoma State
- Lots of ways the Jaguars can go here. They desperately needed a pass rusher but took care of that via free agency (Aaron Kampman). The team's receivers have been subpar for years as David Garrard doesn't really have anyone to throw to (and never has). Bryant could change that, as he has excellent speed and size (6-2). He's a bit of a headcase, but it's make or break time for Jack Del Rio and his staff in Jacksonville.

11. Denver Broncos
Rolando McClain, ILB, Alabama
-- The Broncos have heavily invested in their defensive line via free agency, so it makes sense for them to go with the impact linebacker here, as Andra Davis is aging (D.J. Williams is the other starter at ILB). If they wanted to go offense, look for Georgia Tech WR Demaryius Thomas.

12. Miami Dolphins
Sergio Kindle, OLB, Texas
- Defense, defense, defense. The Dolphins need youth at outside linebacker and nose tackle. So take your pick. Bill Parcells loves an OLB who can rush the passer (see Demarcus Ware).

13. San Francisco 49ers
Joe Haden, CB, Florida
- The 49ers also own the 17th pick, so they could be on the trade market. Assuming they're not, I see them going with Haden, the best corner in the draft despite the concern over his speed. They also need OL, but they can address that with the 17th pick. On a side note, I have seen two mock drafts that have the 49ers taking RB C.J., Spiller with this pick...lunacy. Frank Gore mans the position fine and has some tread left on the tires. Too many other immediate, glaring holes to fill to go that direction.

14. Seattle Seahawks
Derrick Morgan, DE, Georgia Tech
- With their second first-round pick, I'm giving the Seahawks the defensive end to replace the recently-traded Darryl Tapp and let's face it, Patrick Kerney isn't getting any younger, even he even plays this season.

15. New York Giants
Sean Witherspoon, LB, Missouri
- From what I've read about Witherspoon, he is versatile and can play inside or outside, and the Giants need both in the worst of ways. They'd probably take McClain if he fell to them.

16. Tennessee Titans
Jason Pierre-Paul, DE, South Florida- This seems like a no-brainer, as the Titans lost DEs Kyle Vanden Bosch and Jevon Kearse. If Pierre-Paul is gone, look for the Titans to grab Everson Griffen. Cornerback is also a position of need, so watch for Boise State's Kyle Wilson here.

17. San Francisco 49ers
Mike Iupati, OL, Idaho
- The 49ers get their much-needed offensive lineman here. Iupati was a guard at Idaho but apparently teams see him as more of an NFL tackle.

18. Pittsburgh Steelers
Kyle Wilson, CB, Boise State
- I'd say if Iupati would fall to them, he'd be the choice here. But corner is a big need for the Steelers, especially now that the rival Ravens brought in Anquan Bolden. The Steelers have been weak at corner for years, so this makes the most sense.

19. Atlanta Falcons
Brandon Graham, DE, Michigan
- The Falcons have no real pass rush (only 28 sacks last season) and Graham was a monster at Michigan. Seems like a match made in heaven.

20. Houston Texans
Dan Williams, NT, Tennessee
- I struggled with this one, as I think the Texans can go in several different directions. Williams could go prior to this, possibly to the Dolphins, but if he's here I can't see Houston passing up a run-stuffer to fill a gaping hole in their defensive line. They also need a cornerback, and don't count out a running back (Ryan Matthews out of Fresno State is the best one left).

21. Cincinnati Bengals
Taylor Mays, S, Southern Cal
- Some draft boards have Texas S Earl Thomas ahead of Mays, so depending on where the Bengals rank them could change my guess. Either way, defense is a need and they can't go wrong either way. Also, even though they just signed Antonio Bryant, WR Demaryius Thomas may be too enticing to pass up.

22. New England Patriots
Jared Odrick, DE/DT, Penn State
- With the loss of Jarvis Green, the Pats suddenly have a need for a defensive lineman. Odrick can play tackle or end (versatility seems like a running theme in this crop of draft prospects) and Bill Belichick loves guys can fill any role he sees fit.

23. Green Bay Packers
Maurice Pouncey, G/C, Florida
- The Packers had arguably the worst offensive line in the NFL last season. Pouncey is a Day One starter at center and from what I read about him on NFL.com, some coaches and scouts say he can play guard as well. The Packers have a need for younger offensive tackles, but Pouncey is someone they can plug in right away.

24. Philadelphia Eagles
Everson Griffen, DE, Southern Cal
- Another pick tough to handicap. Eagles have needs at offensive line, defensive end and even running back (I am not sold on LeSean McCoy). I'll say they go defensive line, but I'll admit that I have no idea.

25. Baltimore Ravens
Carlos Dunlap, DE, Florida
- Little out-of-the-box thinking here. Most mock drafts I've seen have the Ravens going with Oklahoma TE Jermaine Gresham. That makes sense. But how about some youth and depth on the defensive line? Justin Bannan and Dwan Edwards left via free agency, so if the season started today the Ravens would have older-than-dirt Trevor Pryce at one end and Halotia Ngata at the other. Ngata is more of a nose tackle. Bringing in Dunlap (who had character issues at Florida) would allow the Ravens to add a future star to their defense, and Ozzie Newsome never hesitates adding to his D.

26. Arizona Cardinals
Jermaine Gresham, TE, Oklahoma
- No offense to Anthony Becht, but the Cardinals need a pass-catching tight end who can also block: Gresham fits that bill. The Cards could also go offensive line (Charles Brown, Southern Cal) or defensive line (Brian Price, DT). But I'd take the tight end.

27. Dallas Cowboys
Earl Thomas, S, Texas
- This is a big slide for Thomas, who some have going in the top 15. If he does fall here, expect the Cowboys to pounce as safety is a big position of need for Dallas.

28. San Diego Chargers
Ryan Matthews, RB, Fresno State
- This also seems too obvious (which probably means it won't happen). The Chargers lost LT and Darren Sproles is more of a role player than an every down back. Another apparent match made in heaven.

29. New York Jets
Demaryius Thomas, WR, Georgia Tech
- Even with Braylon Edwards and Jerico Cotchery, the Jets need more offensive playmakers. Cornerback was a huge need, but they filled that in trading for Antonio Cromartie.

30. Minnesota Vikings
Brian Price, DT, UCLA
- The Williams Wall (Pat and Kevin) get older by the day, so drafting a 4-3 tackle like Price makes a lot of sense. Cornerback is another option, so Patrick Robinson of Florida State would be my other guess.

31. Indianapolis Colts
Anthony Davis, OL, Rutgers
- Ryan Diem and Charlie Johnson are solid tackles, but its hard to argue with any team chosing an offensive lineman. Although I'd say that if Price was available, the Colts will take him as they need help at defensive line.

32. New Orleans Saints
Jerry Hughes, DE/LB, TCU
- The Saints can plug Hughes into a of couple different positions of need. He may not slip this far, but in this scenario he does and the Super Bowl champs get a steal.

Always fun to root against winners, right?

I know some will look down on me for saying this, because I am a Yankee fan through and through, but I have never understood what makes people dislike teams because they win. More specifically, I tam talking about the venom I see spit from people when John Calipari and Kentucky are mentioned.
If John Calipari was the coach of your pathetic or annually-disappointing team, would you be upset when he took you to the Elite 8? Or perhaps the Final Four? Would you be upset if he got you recruits like John Wall? Derrick Rose? Chris Douglass Roberts? My guess: You'd take it. You'd take the wins, the top-notch recruits and the success. And find another "greaseball" or "scumbag" coach to criticize and dislike for being good at what they do.
College sports is a business now, folks. It's for grown-ups. This isn't about who has the best pep band anymore, or who has the best fight song. It's about money, money, money and more money. And power. And success. And celebrity. And headlines. And WINS.
So, sorry fan of (insert name of mediocre college team here). You don't like John Calipari or Billy Donovan or Rick Pitino or Nick Saban because they are superior to your team and your coach. Just admit it. You don't like that someone else wins more than you do. I wish people would just own up to that, rather than hide behind covers of "he runs a dirty program" or "he puts too much gel in his hair." 
Like I said, this is a game for grown-ups. Leave the kids stuff at home. 

Urban Meyer is...crazy

Check out this story (and good accompanying video) about Florida coach Urban Meyer (no relation) verbally assaulting an Orlando Sentinel reporter.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5033522
It's so wrong on so many levels what Meyer said to this reporter, who asked Meyer about a quote a Florida player gave about Tim Tebow.
Stay classy, Urban.

Get ready to laugh

My friend Keith forwarded me this website that is doing a "tournament" of all-time ridiculously-crazy names.
Here is the link to the site: http://nameoftheyear.blogspot.com/
This website does a tournament of names every year during March Madness, starting in 1994. These are names from people all over the world, kids, adults, whatever.
I cannot underestimate how incredibly funny some of these names are, just from 2010. If you have spare time and want a laugh, go back through some of the past years and check out some of the names.
Here are my favorites from their 2010 tournament:
Can Du
Just'In Love Smith
Lolita Respectnothing
Nubian Peak (a Virginia Tech football player that actually is from 30 minutes from where I live in Roanoke)
God's Power Offer
Dr. Speedy Nutz
Dick Smallberries Jr.
Pepi Hamburger
Pamela Bals Organista
Steele Sidebottom
Banana Yana
Nohjay Nimpson
Foxy Foxworth

I'm back...and talking about LeBron and scoring titles

I am back from my vacation, as we had company in our home this past weekend (Chad Shumway) and also work at The Roanoke Times has been pretty busy lately, with the NCAA tournament, Virginia Tech in the NIT and high school spring sports beginning. 
Anyway, I'm planning on blogging regularly again, and I hope I still have readers. Enough about my boring life and on to stuff that matters:

I was reading this post on the Cleveland sports blog WaitingForNextYear.com: http://www.waitingfornextyear.com/?p=26454
It talks about LeBron James' comments Thursday regarding being in a race with Oklahoma City's Kevin Durant for the scoring title. On this topic, LeBron said:

“If I really wanted to win a scoring title, I could do it every year — every single year — but it doesn’t matter.”


When LeBron says "it doesn't matter" he is saying that the team's success matters more to him than individual award, which is a good thing. The premise here is that if he wanted to, LeBron could probably score 40-50 points per game by taking any shot at any time, disregarding his teammates, the game situation and all of those factors. That's not the proper way to play basketball. LeBron excels when he gets teammates involved. When his assists are up and turnover are down, the Cavs almost always win. This is obvious to anyone who has ever watched him play. The Cavs have so many options on offense now, LeBron doesn't have to score 40 points per game for the team to win. But, if he wanted to he could. That's what he's saying here. He cares more about winning. I think this applies to any star in the NBA, whether it's Kobe Bryant, Dwyane Wade, Kevin Durant or LeBron. Any of these guys can score 40 per game, but often that isn't the best formula for winning. Sometimes it is, and when that is the case players of this caliber can take over the game and put the team on their backs. LeBron has done this a few times this season, but it seems as though those games are less now than they were in LeBron's second and third years in the league. That is a direct reflection of the talent this current Cavs team has. After all, they did beat the Spurs without LeBron and Antawn Jamison (he missed most of that game).


Speaking of the Spurs, the Cavs play them tonight. Going into the game, LeBron is averaging 29.8 points per game. Durant is at 29.7 points per game. LeBron has one scoring title to his credit, the 2007-08 season when he averaged 30.0 ppg. His career high ppg was 31.4 in the 2005-06 season. 
Fast-forwarding to this season, I wouldn't be surprised to see his scoring average actually dip. Once the Cavs lock up the No. 1 overall seed for the playoffs, LeBron will probably be sitting in the fourth quarters of games, assuming the Cavs continue to play at their current, high level. But, as LBJ said, it doesn't matter. It's all about the wins.

* Photo courtesy of Getty Images

On vacation for a minute

Readers:
I will be taking a blogging vacation this weekend through Monday. I'll be back posting on Tuesday. 
Thanks and please keep reading and checking out the blog.


~Rob

More Ron Washington

Earlier today I wrote about Texas Rangers manager Ron Washington, who admitted Wednesday to using cocaine "once" during the 2009 season. I took the position that Washington needs to be fired immediately, as no Rangers player, fan or executive should have to deal with a manger who does blow.
The story gets better.
Thursday, Washington admitted using marijuana and amphetamines when he was a player.
Look, I know that some Rangers players came out Thursday and supported Washington, saying they respected that he came clean and didn't hide anything. Well, he did come clean and was up front...after he got caught via drug testing.
In an era where owners of pro sports teams look for reasons to fire managers, this is a case where it needed to happen yesterday. I will ask again, how is this guy still employed as a manger in Major League Baseball??

Cocaine, division titles, and Matt Leinart should retire.

The Cavaliers won their third Central Division title in franchise history Wednesday night with a 99-94 victory over the Pacers (read Brian Windhorst's blog here for more on this story).
I think this is worth mentioning because, as I just said, it's just third division title in franchise history and just the second in 31 years (First: 1975-67 season, second: 2008-09, third: 2009-10). In some sports, there are teams like the Braves, or the Yankees, or the Colts, who win their respective divisions every season and hanging a banner is nothing new. Yes, the Cavs have much higher goals than a Central Division title. But it still means something, if only for the rarity of the occasion and also the manner in which the Cavs accomplished it this season: there are still 13 games left. To be fair, it's also worth mentioning the other teams in the Central: Bucks (36-30), Bulls (31-36), Pistons (23-45) and Pacers (22-46). Some pretty bad teams there, yes.
- Here are the Cavs' next five opponents: at Bulls (Friday), vs. Pistons (Sunday), at Hornets (Wednesday March 24), at Spurs (Friday, March 26) and vs. Kings (Sunday, March 28). The Cavs could easily go 4-1 in that stretch, with the tough spot in San Antonio. The Cavs did just beat the Spurs, without LeBron, last week.
- I saw this on ESPN.com this morning: LeBron had 32 points, nine rebounds and nine assists against the Pacers Wednesday night. He passed Magic Johnson to become just the third player to have 49 or more games with 30-plus points, eight-plus rebounds and eight-plus assists. Just in case you didn't know: LeBron is pretty damn good.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Texas Rangers manager Ron Washington admitted to using cocaine in 2009 (read the ESPN.com story here). Washington tested positive, entered Major League Baseball's drug treatment program and offered his resignation, which club president Nolan Ryan refused to accept. Ryan said he did a lot of "soul searching" and decided to keep Washington on the job, as he signed through the upcoming season. "Just because somebody makes a mistake doesn't mean you quit loving them. We'll move forward."

OK. How nice, sympathetic and supportive.

Are you kidding me? There are so many things wrong with this. So many things. How about the fact that YOUR MANAGER DOES COCAINE. Mangers get fired for losing baseball games, some even get fired after winning seasons (see Mike Hargrove). This guy does coke! What is this, Scarface?? 

Washington said he used cocaine only once during the 2009 season. When asked if that was the only time he used illegal drugs, Washington said, "The drug we're talking about, yes."  Once again, so many things wrong here. Now he is implying that he uses or has used other illegal drugs. People, if this isn't ground for firing this guy, what is? If you are a Rangers player, fan or executive, is this the guy you want managing your team? Running your club? How utterly ridiculous. What are the odds that Ryan, or whoever the Rangers' owner is decides to do more "soul searching" and can Ron Washington? I'd say pretty good odds. Quick, somebody get Vegas on the line. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Former Browns quarterback Derek Anderson signed with the Cardinals on Wednesday.  Arizona gave Anderson a two-year contract worth $7.25 million. With incentives, the deal would max out around $18 million. Former Southern Cal star and Heisman Trophy winner Matt Leinart is projected as the Cardinals starter, as Kurt Warner retired following this past season. If anything, this move shows just how much confidence the Cardinals have in Leinart, who boasts a career 70.8 passer rating (Anderson's is 69.7). I hope my dripping sarcasm was evident there. If I was Matt Leinart, I'd go ahead and call it quits now. He's probably got some cash banked. He can probably find work on a reality TV show of some kind. If the Cardinals are bringing in the worst quarterback in the NFL and are paying him $7.25 million dollars, that tells me they aren't so sure Leinart is the QB of the future. That also tells me this franchise is in real, serious trouble. Apparently the front office did not see any game film of Derek Anderson. Or they can't read statistics. Or they didn't know Anderson was cut in favor of Jake Delhomme and Seneca Wallace. Sorry, Cardinals fans. I feel your pain.

* Photo courtesy of The Plain Dealer

Just in case Cleveland fans don't know...

The best blogging site for Cleveland sports fans is http://www.waitingfornextyear.com/
Lots of good articles, insights, analyses and more. I already have it linked on this blog you are you looking at right now, along with some of my other favorite Web links.
Good stuff here.

Do you miss Shaq? (Updated)

Shaquille O'Neal has been sidelined since injuring his thumb against the Celtics on February 25. The Cavs won that game, and since have compiled a 8-1 record. The one loss came against the Bucks, without LeBron James and on the second night of a back-to-back.
- In those eight wins, the Cavs have scored 126, 124, 111, 97, 100,104 and 113 points.
- In those nine games, the Cavs were outrebounded three times (-1 against the Bucks, -2 against the Spurs and -8 against the 76ers).
Those numbers aren't too shabby.
- Also, in those eight wins, one was against a Raptors team that boasts the biggest starting lineup in the NBA, one was against Tim Duncan and the Spurs and one was against the Celtics, a playoff team. (The five four came against the Nets, Knicks, Pistons, twice, and 76ers).
See what I'm getting at here? The Cavs conceivably haven't skipped a beat since Shaq went down. And that is OK. Why? Because they acquired Shaq specifically should the situation arise when they face a playoff series against Dwight Howard and the Magic. In three games against the Magic this season (two Cleveland) wins, Shaq played Howard quite well.
Some reports say Shaq will return prior to the start of the playoffs in April. Some reports say he won't be back until the Eastern Conference semifinals, should the Cavs make it that far (good money says they will).
In the meantime, the Cavs should continue to play well with Anderson Varejao and J.J. Hickson manning the middle and will get Zyrdrunas Ilgauskas back later this month.
So, I'll pose my original question again: Do you miss Shaq?
I don't, but I'll be glad when he's back.

* Photo courtesy of The Plain Dealer

Bidding adieu to Brady Quinn..and Kameron Wimbley??

Sunday, March 14, 2010 was Trade Day for the Browns, apparently, trading Brady Quinn to Denver and Kameron Wimbley to Oakland (read the story here).

Out of complete admiration and respect for Plain Dealer columnist Terry Pluto, I am going to format this blog post like Pluto does with some of his columns, posing some questions to myself and then answering them. Here we go:

Q: Did the Browns get fair compensation for Brady Quinn?
A: Yes and no (sorry to ride the fence, but its the truth).

Q: OK, so why did the Browns get a good deal from Denver?
A: The Browns received Denver's sixth-round pick in 2011, a conditional pick in 2012 and running back/fullback Peyton Hillis. Thanks to a pile of different factors, the Browns got the following out of their supposed "savior quarterback" Brady Quinn: 14 games, 1,902 yards, 10 touchdowns, 9 interceptions, 52.1 completion percentage and 66.8 rating. Oh, and a 3-10 record as a starter. For those terrible stats and not-good production, the Browns did get fair compensation. Hillis is a powerhouse and was beloved in Denver for his toughness and grit. Perfect fit for an Eric Mangini coached team. He'll provide a nice power option to the speed and finesse of Jerome Harrison at the running position. Also, Hillis is a solid goal-line option. And draft picks could be good or bad. We'll have to wait and see there.

Q: So why did the Browns get hosed?
A: Consider that to get Quinn, then-general manager Phil Savage gave up multiple selections in the 2007 draft and the Browns' first-round selection in the 2008 draft to the Cowboys. That is a steep price to pay for a quarterback who was supposed to turn around the franchise and ended up with three total wins. But, despite those ugly statistics he has compiled, he is still a basically an unknown. As I have written about and talked about so many times over the years, Quinn has never played a full season as a starting quarterback. The sample size to judge him is very small. There isn't much game film on him. The offensive weapons he's had to work with have been sub-par (consider Derek Anderson had Kellen Winslow, Braylon Edwards, Joe Jurevicius and a still-running strong Jamal Lewis in his "magical" 2007 season; last season Quinn had Mohammed Massaquoi, Mike Furrey and a long-since-called-it-quits Jamal Lewis). He's had some unfortunate injuries. But he has the pedigree and attitude to succeed in the NFL. ESPN's Ron Jaworski is on record saying he likes Quinn's mechanics. So, could Quinn supplant Kyle Orton as the Broncos starter at QB? Absolutely. Could he be the Broncos new franchise QB? Yes. Could he be nothing but a backup and be out of the league in three years? Yes. The point here is that nobody really knows what Brady Quinn is.

Q: We know he's not accurate, after all doesn't he have a career completion percentage of 52.1?
A: Yes, that is terrible and troubling. He also didn't seem to ever want to throw the ball deep. But in fairness, who was he going to throw deep to? The Browns receiving corps is not very good.

Q: Are you going to continue to defend Quinn and keep writing the same stuff over and over?
A: I guess he's Denver's problem now. I am not a Notre Dame fan. I have no personal crush on Quinn. I was intrigued by him and was excited when the Browns drafted him. I thought at times he didn't get a fair shot from the Phil Savage regime and the Eric Mangini regime. But as hard as this keeps getting, I cheer for the name on the front of the jersey, not the back. My final position on Quinn is that he may be an NFL star. Or he may be another name in the long line of former college stars at quarterback who didn't have the makeup (mental or physical) to make it in the NFL. Only time will tell. I disagree with people who have already written him off. But it's hard to defend him time after time, I will admit.

Q: So that's it? No more on Brady Quinn?
A: From this point on, I am done writing/talking about him. Time to look forward and not backward. Good luck in Denver. Let's all move on.

Q: So where does that leave the Browns at quarterback? 
A: Jake Delhomme and Seneca Wallace. I have written about both of them on this blog, no need to repeat myself too much. In short, I was in favor of acquiring Seneca Wallace for a 2011 seventh-round draft pick. I was not in favor of the Browns paying Jake Delhomme $7 million this season. I think former Jet Bret Ratliff is still on the roster. And all of this means the Browns will probably draft a quarterback in April. Think somewhere between rounds two and five.

Q: Who would they draft?
A: I am still researching the NFL Draft. Read this for some possible names. I will write more about this later, but as of right now, I am intrigued by Colt McCoy of Texas. Google him to read more about him.

Q: How do you feel about going into the 2010 season with Jake Delhomme as the starting QB?
A: Terrible. Terrible. I am hoping that this is a one-year thing. My prediction is that Delhomme may not even make it through the whole season, eventually giving way to Wallace or whichever QB the Browns may draft.

Q: So you are rooting against Delhomme? What about what you just said regarding 'Root for the name on the front and not the back'?
A: No, I am not rooting against Delhomme. I want to see him do well because in order for the Browns to win, he needs to play well. But, I am a realist before anything else. I will not be sucked in by the Browns PR staff or whatever glowing things Mike Holmgren says about Jake Delhomme. I know what I see and read. Delhomme's best and productive years are far behind him and it was a mistake for the Browns to sign him. Period. I hope I am wrong.

Q: So that's it? Is there any good that comes out of this QB sitation?
A: Yes. For one, the "Derek Anderson or Brady Quinn or neither?" dark cloud is finally gone from above Berea. I will admit that it will be refreshing to not have to think about that debate any longer. Both guys are gone in what may have been the frustrating, puzzling and ultimately worthless QB competition ever. The long-term answer for the Browns at the QB position is not on the roster. At least we know that much.

Q: Let's move on. We all knew Brady Quinn would get dealt. What about Kameron Wimbley? 
A:  I had no idea the Browns were even shopping the linebacker, their first-round pick from the 2006 draft. Apprently there were multiple offers out there for Wimbley, and the Browns sent him to the Raiders for a third-round pick in this year's draft. Here's Wimbley's career stats. I don't need to recap his entire career, but here's the basics: After playing defense end at Florida State, the Browns converted Wimbley to outside linebacker to fit their 3-4 scheme, a common practice in the NFL. Wimbley had a fantastic rookie year, posting 11 sacks. But in the following two seasons, he posted just five and four, respectively, and had 6.5 this past season (which led the team). Wimbley is a durable player who was the Browns' best pass rusher, period. That's what you need to know.

Q: Why did the Browns trade Wimbley? And was it a good trade?
A: It's hard to say, and I am not sure. Wimbley is a free agent after this season. Maybe they didn't want to pay him. Or maybe Mike Holmgren wants to purge the Browns roster, much like Eric Mangini did last offseason. Getting a third-round pick is not bad compensation, but the question is how are the Browns going to replace arguably their second most-talented defensive player?

Q: OK. So that's a new question. How will they replace Wimbley? And what are they left with at outside linebacker?
A: The Browns are still relatively deep at outside linebacker with undrafted free agent Marcus Benard (who looked pretty good in spots this past season), Matt Roth, Jason Trusnic and new addition Scott Fujita. Assume they'll draft a linebacker, or multiple linebackers in April.

Q: OK...so they traded their best pass rusher for a third round pick...I still don't get it. Why?
A: Like I said, I am unsure. My best guess is what I said earlier...Mike Holmgren wants to gut the team. That's how it goes in the NFL when someone new takes over. Cleveland fans should be used to it. Butch Davis gutted the team Dwight Clark put together. Phil Savage gutted the team Butch Davis put together. Eric Mangini gutted the team Phil Savage put together. And now Mike Holmgren is gutting the team Eric Mangini put together. I see no other logical explanation unless something happened behind the scenes with Wimbley.

Q: You keep mentioning the draft. So what exactly do the Browns have now in terms of picks?
A: Great question. Here's what the Browns have in April's NFL Draft:
Through several trades and dealings, the Browns currently own 12 picks (there are seven rounds). Those picks are:
- 1 first round
- 1 second round
- 3 third round
- 1 fourth round
- 4 fifth round
- 2 sixth round
- 0 seventh round
Expect that number to change during the weekend of the draft. Surely, some of these picks will be package to facilitate other moves the team will make. And I expect a lot of moves. But to go into the draft with 12 picks is a good thing.

Q: Wow. This is an entirely too long blog post. Is there anything else, assuming there is anyone still reading?
A: Haha. I make myself laugh. In closing, I'll say that Mike Holmgren, Tom Heckert and Eric Mangin better hit a home run in the draft. Several home runs, actually. Make that a couple grand slams. Because, if not, fans and the media (national and local) are going to write off this new version of the Browns, very, very quickly. And rightfully so.

The Browns find their answer at QB....(Expanded, reworked version)

The Browns signed Carolina Panthers' castoff Jake Delhomme Saturday, which means there is another new quarterback in Cleveland (read the ESPN.com story here).
Delhomme agreed to a two-year deal with the Browns and will make around $7 million from the club (he will also make $12 million this season from Carolina, which released him last week). That is serious money, folks.
Delhomme (here's his stats page on Football Reference) is 35 years old and is coming off his worst season as a pro, where he threw a whopping 18 interceptions compared to just eight TDs and compiled a 4-7 record as the Panthers' starter. Carolina shut him down after 11 games (officially he broke a finger). He's been in a tailspin of sorts since his six-turnover playoff debacle against the Cardinals in 2008, which was followed up by a five-turnover debacle in the '09 season opener. That's the bad, at least the notable parts.
The good?
Delhomme has 54 career wins, a Pro Bowl appearance, two NFC Championship appearances and a Super Bowl appearance. And, according to Mary Kay Cabot of The Plain Dealer, there is one other skill Delhomme brings with him to Cleveland: he knows Mike Holmgren's West Coast offense.
Cabot's article says: Delhomme spent three seasons learning Holmgren's preferred scheme from Packers head coach Mike McCarthy, who was his offensive coordinator in New Orleans from 2000-02. Like Wallace, Delhomme is well-versed in the West Coast, to which the Browns are making a seismic shift.  My response to that is this: Is running a preferred scheme so important that you're going to go with a quarterback whose best days are far behind him?
- Delhomme's agent said late Saturday that Delhomme wasn't coming to Cleveland to be a backup. Mike Holmgren told The Plain Dealer this past week that if the Browns signed Delhomme, the starting QB job would not be promised to him. Holmgren has also said that he doesn't believe in quarterback competitions. OK. Seems like there is an inconsistency there. As of March 14, 2010, the Browns are going into this season with Jake Delhomme as their starting QB, considering the trade of Brady Quinn to Denver. It's hard not to question this move, and Sports Illustrated's NFL guru Peter King called it "insanity." Couldn't have said it better myself

Since 1999, the Browns have had eight different opening-week quarterbacks. Looks like that carousel will continue.

If the playoffs started today...

If the NBA playoffs started today, here's what the first-round matchups would look like (through Saturday night's games):

EAST
No. 1 seed Cavaliers vs No. 8 seed Raptors
No. 4 seed Hawks vs. No. 5 seed Bucks
No. 2 seed Magic vs. No. 7 seed Heat
No. 3 seed Celtics vs. No. 6 seed Bobcats

* The Raptors are just a half game out of the No. 7 spot, and the Heat and Bobcats are tied for that No. 7 spot but the Bobcats hold the tiebreaker (better conference record). The Bucks, at No. 5, are two games ahead of the Bobcats.
* With these matchups, that means the Cavs would be facing a first-round matchup with the Raptors. I'd say that is pretty favorable. The Raptors have been on a downslide lately and don't play a lick of defense. I believe they boast the tallest starting lineup in the NBA, highlighted by 7-footers Chris Bosh and Andrea Bargniani (both of whom can shoot from almost anywhere on the court). The Cavs have beaten the Raptors in two out of three meetings so far (Toronto won in the season's second game). The teams play again on April 6.
* Shaquille O'Neal may or may not be back by the first round, although I am guessing he will. Whether he plays or not is a significant factor, as the Cavs will need his inside presence. With that being said, with or without him I like the Cavs to win that series in five games. As I said, the Raptors don't play defense. Hedo Turkoglu does scare me though (remember what he did to the Cavs last season in the playoffs).
* Assuming the Cavs beat the Raptors in this projected matchup, they'd get the Heat-Bucks series winner, leaving a potential matchup with Magic or Celtics for the East finals. This is the reason why that No. 1 seed is so important.
*Looking past today, if these standings stay similar over the next month, the Cavs could conceivably play any of the last four seeded teams (Bucks, Heat, Bobcats, Raptors). The Bucks are playing really well right now, so for the sake of this analysis let's assume they hang on to the No. 5 slot. That would leave the Heat, Bobcats and Raptors as potential first round matchups. I still think the Raptors represent the easiest matchup. The Bobcats own the Cavs this season, but in a seven-game series I give the Cavs the edge. The Heat are the X-factor to me. Some nights, they look like they could win the East. Other nights, they don't look like a playoff team. It will be interesting to see where they end up.
* As of today, the Bulls are two games back of the Raptors for that last playoff spot. I set the odds at 50-50 whether or not the Bulls can sneak in to the playoffs. That is also a matchup I like in the Cavs' favor, as the Bulls are young I don't see them presenting a huge problem for the Cavs in a seven-game series. They are very talented, though I am not sure they know "how to win" a playoff series against a veteran team like the Cavs.
* Looking at some of these other potential matchups, I think the Hawks at No. 4 would take out the Bucks. The No. 2 seed Magic could have some trouble with the Heat, but I like Orlando in seven games there. The interesting one is the potential Bobcats-Celtics matchup. The Celtics are old, slow and aren't playing well right now and I don't see a reason why they won't continue to falter. The Bobcats are young, athletic, explosive and have Michael Jordan playing H-O-R-S-E with them in practice. Potential first-round upset? You do the math.

WEST

No. 1 seed Lakers vs No. 8 seed Blazers

No. 4 seed Jazz vs. No. 5 seed Thunder

No. 2 seed Mavericks vs. No. 7 seed Spurs

No. 3 seed Nuggets vs. No. 6 seed Suns

Resting LeBron....good or bad?

I found Cavaliers coach Mike Brown's decision to rest LeBron James recently in games against the Spurs (win) and Bucks (loss) a very interesting one. Overall, I am in favor of it. LeBron has been battling some minor, nagging injures and now has a full week of rest under his belt and will play tonight against the 76ers (Antawn Jamison will not, as his injured knee has flared up again).
LeBron himself and said he was fine with the decision to rest him, as this is the perfect time in the season to do so. The Cavs have a 15-game lead in the Central Division, a 4.5-game lead over the Magic for the best record in the East, and a 3-game lead over the Lakers for the best record in the NBA.
As far as decisions go, it would have been a bad one to play LeBron in these past two games knowing that he is banged up, as the worst-case scenario would be LeBron getting hurt and facing a significant number of games on the sideline. Though I was very encouraged by their win over the Spurs this past Monday without LeBron, the Cavs would certainly slide in the standings if LeBron were to be out for a long period of time.
LeBron is playing 39 minutes per game this season, as compared to 37.7 last season and 40.04 the season before that. If you recall, last season the Cavs blew out so many teams that often, LeBron was sitting for the entire or the majority of the fourth quarter.
This was a savvy move by the Cavs' coaching staff and hopefully it will pay dividends as the season progresses.

-----------------------------------------------------------

I like the Browns' signing of free agent tight end Ben Watson (read The Plain Dealer's story here). Watson is a big target and is known for his pass catching and speed rather than his blocking, but that's fine. Whoever ends up playing quarterback will benefit greatly from this signing, as the Browns' receiving corps is not very good and is very young and inexperienced. Watson was a favorite target of Tom Brady's in red zone situations and has experienced winning with the Patriots (I would like to see the Browns draft a tight end in April somewhere between rounds 5 and 7). He is a definite upgrade over Robert Royal and Evan Moore. Kudos to Mike Holmgren and Tom Heckert.

Brady Quinn will be next out the door

As it was not surprising that the Browns released QB Derek Anderson this week, Brady Quinn could be next with a ticket out of town, as there are reports from ESPN's Adam Schefter that the club is shopping Quinn. Also, free agent QB Jake Delhomme, recently cut loose by the Panthers, is scheduled to visit the Browns Thursday. These two news items, in addition to the acquisition of Seneca Wallace, means that yes, Quinn will probably be traded either before or during April's NFL Draft. Quinn also told The Plain Dealer he would "welcome" a trade if could not be the starter this season.
I (and many others) have spent a lot of time in the last two days writing about sub-par quarterbacks. It's getting old. Obviously, the "new" Browns (Mike Holmgren) wants nothing to do with Quinn and most likely doesn't think he can effectively run the West Coast offense. Coach Eric Mangini was never really high on Quinn, as evident by the quick hook he had for Quinn when he didn't play well.
My stance on Quinn has never wavered: I believe there is not enough game film to properly evaluate Quinn as an NFL quarterback. He has yet to play a full season (due to many factors), which to me makes it difficult to gauge his true abilities. Quinn has been in the league for three seasons, and in that time has made just nine starts. That isn't enough to say he's terrible or to say he's the next Tom Brady.
- If it were up to me, I'd name the Quinn the starter before the season, let him get acclimated to the new offense in training camp, get a feel for running the team and go with him in Week 1. I also wouldn't have a quick hook for him, despite Seneca Wallace holding the clipboard. Obviously, if Quinn was awful, he wouldn't deserve to keep his job. But if he never gets that chance, nobody will be able to make that determination.
- In his three season and nine starts, what we have seen is not good. Too many turnovers. Too many balls underthrown. Almost ignoring throwing the ball deep. Poor stats (career 66.8 rating, 10 touchdowns and nine interceptions). The good? More touchdowns than interceptions. He did seem to have a knack for the no-huddle offense last season. Other than that, there isn't much else positive to say about the guy.
- Is Quinn is a draft bust, like hundreds of other players? Possibly. He hasn't gotten a fair shake in Cleveland? Possibly. Could he get traded somewhere else and find success? Possibly. See the problem there? The answers to those questions are "possibly" and not "yes" and "no".
- I am curious to see who or what the Browns could get for Quinn in a trade. Another QB? Late-round draft pick? Perhaps someone to fill holes in the secondary? In any case, this QB carousel in Cleveland needs to end at some point. I am tired of watching, reading about and writing about sub-par guys.
It's fair to say that it's in all parties' best interest if Quinn and the Browns part ways.

Kobe=Clutch

Late Tuesday night after I got home from work, I got to watch a really good NBA game between the Lakers and Raptors (thank you NBA Network). Toronto held the lead for much of the game, until the fourth quarter when the Lakers woke up. L.A. had lost three straight coming into the game and it was obvious watching this game that Kobe Bryant wasn't happy with how his team has been playing as of late. He decided to take matters into his own hands, hitting the game-winning shot with two guys in his face with 1.9 seconds left (read ESPN's game recap here). 
Kobe has hit this same game-winning shot probably 100 times during his brilliant career (full disclosure: I am a Kobe fan and supporter and always have been). But as soon as he touched the ball on this last play, you just knew the shot was going in. Didn't matter that he was falling back. Didn't matter if there were two people in his face. It was going in. 
"That's my responsibility here, to close things out," he said after the game. 
Kobe is clutch. When the game's on the line, he's an assassin, a killer. Ice in his veins. All those wonderful cliches. But they are all true. He has that nasty streak that all the clutch players in NBA history have had (Jordan and Bird are the first two that come to mind). Also, after the game, when asked about taking away any positives from the win, Kobe said "This thing tonight was garbage." Any positives, Kobe? "None," he replied.
That is cold stuff. But Kobe knows that the ship still isn't righted if you need an off-balance buzzer beater to beat the Raptors, at home no less. After he hit the shot, he didn't dance around the arena, he didn't pretend to take pictures with his teammates (like a certain player from a certain town in Northeast Ohio). He just walked off the court. Cold, calculating.
Look, I love LeBron James and he is the best all-around player in the league, hands down. But when the game is on the line, I will take Kobe every time. Every time. I know LBJ has hit game-winning shots in his career. Several actually. But Kobe has that real nasty edge, that assassin mentality that LeBron doesn't seem to have, at compared to Kobe's. Maybe as LeBron continues to develop, he will acquire that attribute. In fact I guarantee he will. But until then, Kobe is the King of Clutch. And I was very glad I got to watch the latest example on Tuesday night.

* Photo courtesy of Getty Images

One more on DA

From ESPN's Rachel Nichols (via Twitter): Browns release QB Derek Anderson - afterward in an e-mail to the News-Herald, he said: "The fans are ruthless and don't deserve a winner." 

Maybe not, DA. Maybe not. But we deserve a better quarterback than you, someone who can post a QB rating better than 50, someone who can call a play and someone who can throw the ball to the right team more than half the time. In my analysis of DA on my previous post, I neglected to mention what a scumbag he is. Here's the proof. 

The Browns may not be good in 2010. Or 2011. Or 2012. But they will be much better off without Derek Anderson. That is a guarantee. Period.

DA: Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out (expanded)

Not surprisingly, quarterback Derek Anderson was released by the Browns Tuesday afternoon. Here's analysis on the story by Tony Grossi of The Plain Dealer. Talk about a dream come true for me, and many other sane Browns fans.
Anderson, who has long-been the bane of my existence, was due a $2 million roster bonus on March 12 and his salary this season would have been $7.45 million, which made him unattractive trade bait. The Browns didn't want to pay him the bonus, or his bloated salary, as they just traded for a quarterback in Seneca Wallace and have Brady Quinn and Brett Ratliff on the roster.
So DA goes bye-bye, and justifiably so for many, many reasons.
This is in no way, no way, a defense of Brady Quinn. I say this because there are certain people that bring up Brady Quinn's shortcomings as a QB whenever I bring up Derek Anderson's shortcomings. This is not a comparison of the two. This is not an analysis of Brady Quinn. For the record, I think Quinn deserves the chance to start for the Browns and play a full, 16-game season (barring that he is healthy). To this point, Brady Quinn hasn't shown much and there have been times when he has looked terrible. So there's my stance on BQ. Back to the topic at hand....
- I have been a harsh, harsh critic of Derek Anderson's since he came on the scene in the 2007 season, when he put up good numbers against an easy schedule filled with bad teams. Yes, he won 10 of his 15 starts in '07 and threw for 3,787 yards and 29 touchdowns. He also threw 19 interceptions, four of which came against the Bengals in game No. 15 in a situation where if the Browns won the game, they'd sneak into the playoffs. Yea, that didn't happen as Anderson tried to force balls into tight spots in a game where the wind was blowing at considerable speeds in Cincinnati. Don't forget, Browns fans, that part of the reason Anderson seemed so great in 2007 was the fact that the season began with Charlie Frye as the starter. That lasted all of one half as Frye was hammered in the opener against the Steelers and DA was given his shot at that point and the team never went back to Frye.
- Since that 2007 season, Anderson's career as been identified with too many turnovers, too much incosistency, too much inaccuracy and, at times, the inability to manage the game at a fundamental level and even call plays at the line of scrimmage. After that 2007 season, when he made the Pro Bowl after other QBs dropped out, then-GM Phil Savage didn't want to lose Anderson so he signed the QB to a three-year deal worth $24 million ($14M guaranteed). Keep in mind, if Savage wouldn't have panicked and threw a bunch of money at DA, the Browns could have put a first and third round tender on DA, which at the time he was a hot commodity and there may have been a stupid GM from another team who would have paid that price to get him.
- Another thing about that 2007 season: look at the weapons Anderson had around him. A focused Braylon Edwards and a healthy Kellen Winslow catching passes, a healthy Jamal Lewis running all over the place and Joe Jurevicius as a safety net as the possession receiver. Compare that to the offensive pieces the Browns had this past season. I think Anderson showed his true colors in the 2008 season, when his alarming inconsistencies really came to the front as his final QB rating was 66.5. He had one really good moment in 2008, the Monday Night Football win over the Giants. Call it an abnormality. He was even worse in 2009, posting a 42.1 rating with three TD passes and 10 INTs.
So after all of this, how does anyone defend the guy and claim he is a legit NFL QB?
- Are there worse QBs in the NFL? Yes. Plenty.
- Is he old and washed up? No. Anderson is 26 years old, relatively young for an NFL QB.
- Does have have the physical tools? Yes, he has a rocket arm and has the body size that appeals to NFL coaches and front office people.
- Does he have the mental tools? No. This is where my problem with DA lies. I am not an NFL scout, or a general manager. But I do know that physical tools are probably less than half of what you need to be a successful QB in the NFL, the hardest position to play. Reading defenses, reading coverages, recognizing blitzes, knowing when to stay in the pocket or leave it, memorizing the receiver's routes ...and much, much more. From what I've seen of Anderson, he does not possess the football intelligence necessary to become a good QB. Look at Drew Brees. He is all of 5-foot-9. You need much, much, much more than to be tall to succeed in the NFL.
As Tony Grossi points out in the article I linked to above, Anderson will most definitely get signed, possibly by Arizona, Seattle or St. Louis. Is there a chance he could resurrect his career and become a good starter? Crazier things have happened. But his flaws are documented on tape, his stats are in black and white and consider that he was just cut from a team in favor of Brady Quinn and Seneca Wallace. Hardly Tom Brady and Drew Brees there.
The fact that this new Browns front office (Mike Holmgren, Tom Heckert) knows that Derek Anderson is not the answer says volumes to me. Maybe sanity, sense and good football decisions are finally going to be seen in Berea after years of incompetence. For me, this is a huge step in the right direction.

*Photo courtesy of the Associated Press

Seneca Wallace and other Browns stuff

Monday night, the Browns traded for Seahawks quarterback Seneca Wallace, sending a late-round 2011 draft pick to Seattle (click here to read The Plain Dealer's story). I won't repeat everything you can read in that story, or ESPN.com or anywhere else, but for those who may not be familiar with Wallace: Browns president Mike Holmgren, at the time the Seahawks head coach and GM, drafted Wallace out of Iowa State in the fourth round of the 2003 draft. Holmgren was very high on Wallace's versatility and wanted to develop him as a QB, though some draft experts saw Wallace as an Antwan Randel-El type-player (receiver/returner). Wallace has served as Matt Hasselbeck's primary backup since and has made some starts in place of Hasselbeck when he was injured. Wallace is 5-9 as a starter with a career passer rating of 83.1. From everything I've read about him, and from what I've seen, Wallace is a very fast and mobile QB who can be a problem for defenses. He's a capable receiver and could make an interesting weapon in a Wildcat package with Josh Cribbs. He's accurate as a passer, knows Holmgren's West Coast offense (which the Browns will likely begin to run this season) and and is a veteran, knows the game and is a good locker room guy. Here's his career stats page on ProFootballReference.com.
Those are the basics. So where does he fit with this team?
For one, this means Derek Anderson is likely as good as gone (thank the Lord). The Browns owe Anderson a $2 million roster bonus on March 19, which means that if DA is on the team on that date, he gets that money. If he is not on the team, the Browns keep that money.
Second, this could mean Brady Quinn is also on his way out, as the Browns could use Wallace as a transitional QB this season and may draft a QB this season or next to start in the future. Third, Wallace could be a solid backup option behind Quinn, or another QB if the Browns bring in someone else.
I'll be honest, as of Monday night at 12:30 a.m. I am not sure what the Browns will do. Right now, I'd guess option No. 2 -- Wallace will start for the Browns this year after Quinn is dealt on draft day. It's safe to say that it's too early to tell. Holmgren and GM Tom Heckert may not have properly evaluated Quinn yet and may want to do so this season. Either that, or they know he is not an NFL starting QB and will ship him out. I hope this isn't the case, as I believe Brady Quinn deserves a shot to be the Browns starter for a full 16-game season. But he will likely have to learn the West Coast offense this season, which may not be a smooth transition. These questions will all be answered as we get into April. I like this move as I have read nothing but positive things about Seneca Wallace.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Browns made a couple of moves in free agency this weekend, signing linebacker Scott Fujita from the Saints and offensive tackle Tony Pashos from the 49ers (click this for the PD story).  You can read about both players' careers in-depth in that provided link. I like both moves, as Pashos provides depth to the offensive line and may start at right tackle, replacing Pork Chop Womack, last year's starter. Fujita was a key component on the Super Bowl-champion Saints defense, and may start at inside linebacker after playing on the outside in New Orleans' 4-3 scheme (the Browns play a 3-4). A good start by Holmgren and Co.

Is this Major League IV?

Here's the Indians' projected lineup for this season. You may want to strap yourself down in case you are so blown away with anticipation of seeing these guys play:

C- Lou Marson
1b- Russell Braynan
2b- Luis Valbuena
3b- Jhonny Peralta
SS- Asdrubal Cabrera
OF- Matt LaPorta
OF- Shin-Soo Choo,
OF- Grady Sizemore
DH - Travis Hafner
Rotation: Jake Westbook, Fausto Carmona, Jstin Masterson, David Huff, Aaron Laffey
Bullpen: Chris Perez, Joe Smith, Tony Sipp, Jensen Lewis, Jess Todd, Kerry Wood

In the immortal words of Pepper Leach when he spots Rick Vaughn for the first time: "Look at this f*cking guy." Apply that to 90 percent of this team.

There is room in Yankeeland, people!! We always accept more followers. Trust me, the grass is definitely greener on this side.

Some love for Tim Duncan

As the Cavs will take on the Spurs Monday night, I thought this would be a good time to talk about one of my favorite NBA players, Tim Duncan. It seems to me that at times, people forget about Duncan when mentioning the best players in the game, past and present. Well I'm here to tell you that not only is Tim Duncan one of the top players in the league now, but you could argue that he is the best "power forward" ever.  For some reason, Duncan seems to still be underrated and because he is quiet on and off the court, people forget about him. He never draws attention to himself on or off the court; when is the last time you heard his name mentioned in a negative light? Think hard, because I can't recall one incident. All he does in win championships and put up incredible stats.
- Speaking of stats, here are some of his career numbers (through Friday's games): 20,301 points (21.3 per game), 11,148 rebounds (11.7 per game), 2,212 blocks (2.3 per game) 50.8 field goal percentage (and yes, a stellar 68.7 free throw percentage.
- He's been to 12 All-Star games, has two league MVP awards, three Finals MVP awards, is a nine-time All-NBA First team honoree..oh yea, and he is four championship rings with the Spurs (1999, 2003, 05, 07). An incredible, automatic Basketball Hall of Fame resume. And at 34, he still has some good years in front of him. This season, his averages are 19.2 points and 10.9 rebounds per game.
- One of the things I always liked about Duncan was his consistency. In 13 NBA seasons, he has never averaged less than 18 points or 10.5 rebounds per game and has never shot less than 48.5 percent from the field. That means he's never had a sub-par season, in 13 years. Think of all of the variables that can happen to a player, or team, in each NBA season. Duncan has weathered the storms each year, although in fairness there aren't many storms in San Antonio to weather as the Spurs are consistently one of the best-run pro franchises in all of sports.
- Aside from the stats, Duncan is a winner, plain and simple. He'll go down as one of the best interior forces in league history, with a huge arsenal of offensive moves in the pain to go along with great rebounding and defensive skills. Also, Duncan is one of the best fundamental basketball players ever, ask Shaq, who coined  Duncan "The Big Fundamental". Very appropriate nickname.
- I didn't provide anything here that hasn't been said before by other NBA fans, but I wanted to shine some light on a guy that I feel gets forgotten about at times.

Some rapid reaction to NFL free agency

My reactions to some of the moves made in the NFL on Thursday-Friday as free agency began:

- It's interesting that next season is an uncapped one in the NFL...no salary cap. Teams can have as high of a payroll as they want for the first time. But nobody is really going all out, as owners are afraid to drop millions and millions in fear of a lockout in 2011, which threatens to cancel that season. For more on this subject, check out ESPN.com or NFL.com as there are dozens and dozens of articles and reports on this out there.
- I think both teams won in the Anquan Boldin-Ravens deal. Baltimore gets a three-time Pro Bowler and a top-10 receiver (when he is healthy). Arizona gets two draft picks, one 3rd and one 4th round, which is fairly good compensation for a guy that was a headache to the franchise the past three years. Joe Flacco was just given the best weapon he's had to work with. The Ravens have been close the past two years, which has included a trip to the AFC title game. I am not sure this is the move to get them over the "hump" but it's a giant step.
- Julius Peppers (above) really cashed in, getting around $72 million from the Bears. He does have 81 career sacks, but his inconsistency with the Panthers they past few years is a huge red flag. The Bears may get two of three good seasons out of him, now that he is happy and rich.
- Speaking of the Bears, I don't like the signing of RB Chester Taylor, especially not $12.5 million. He's a third-down back who is there to push starter Matt Forte. Seems like a reach.
- I like the Jets trading a 2011 third-round pick to the Chargers for CB Antonio Cromartie. He's a headcase, but if he gets his mind right the Jets now have the best cornerback duo in the NFL (Cromartie and Darrell Revis).
- Glad to see Josh Cribbs and the Browns settle their mess. Fair deal for both sides.
- I will be interested to see where RB Thomas Jones ends up after being released from the Jets on Friday. I think he has one or two good seasons left, although there's a lot of wear on those tires.

Cribbs update

I am not trying to be ESPN.com here, but only because I have been writing so much about it, here are the financial terms of Josh Cribbs' new, restructured contract with the Browns (courtesy of, you guessed it, ESPN):
The Browns re-did the final three years of Cribbs' deal and will pay him a maximum of $18.5 million over that span. Included in the deal are guarantees worth $7 million, a source told ESPN.com's John Clayton.
 Quite a big raise for JC. Well-deserved too. Glad this dark cloud has passed over the Browns (if there ever really was a dark cloud, that is).

Taking stock of the first 11 Bond films

As some of you may (or may not) know, I recently began watching the James Bond film series, in chronological order. Until this past Thanksgiving, I had yet to see a Bond film, in its entirety. This week I watched Moonraker, the 11th Bond film of 22 (technically there are 23, but Never Say Never Again is not recognized as an "official" Bond film). So now that I am through half of the film series, I thought it would be good to share some of my thoughts on each one. The films are listed in chronological order. I don't have a list of my favorite films, as I like and dislike each one for different reasons. But I will say my favorite so far is Live and Let Die.

Dr. No (Sean Connery, 1963)

The first Bond film was a little rough around the edges, but I enjoyed the "basicness" of it. Dr. No does not rely on Bond gadgets or extreme campy humor to entertain -- it's a straight espionage film. Connery's first appearance as Bond is played more like a detective than British SS agent with a license to kill. I liked how low-key the film is. And Honey Ryder is one of my favorite Bond girls of the films I have seen. Dr. No was a good villain, both in the script and via Joseph Wiseman's acting. A very enjoyable film that set the bar very high for subsequent releases. Also, despite it being made 47 years ago, the film does not seem "dated", like some of the other 1960s-70s Bond films do.

From Russia With Love (Sean Connery, 1964)

My favorite Connery bond film, From Russia With Love has all the ingredients you want in a Bond film: Good villains (Robert Shaw as Red Grant; and the Russian female villain Rosa Klebb), good Bond girl (Tatiana Romanova) and fantastic scenes, like the action scene on the train near the end of the film. The plot is straightforward and simple and the script is regarded as one the best of all the Bond films. The movie moves at a relatively fast pace, which is remarkable because at this point, we still are not into all of the high-tech Bond gadgets. Another good thing about this film is that it is not saturated with corny humor or extraneous dialogue. Much like Dr. No, the simplicity of this film is a strength, not a weakness. Also, it is easy to see that Connery becomes much more comfortable as James Bond in this film. Another timeless classic.

 

Goldfinger (Sean Connery, 1964)

Ah...everyone's favorite. Goldfinger. I know this may seem like blasphemy to Bond fans, but I did not really enjoy this film as everyone else seems to have. And I can't really explain why. It has become the model for every Bond film after it in almost every aspect. Goldfinger and Oddjob are memorable villains. The action and death scenes are great (like the one where Bond is almost cut in half with Goldfinger's laser). The plot is stellar (Goldfinger taking over the U.S., Mint). The famous Aston Martin is here. This was the film where the Bond gadgets become a plot staple. And for God's sakes, Pussy Galore is in this film!! Even with all of these iconic moments, I still think it was lacking something, and like I said, I am not sure what.  To me, the scene that sets up the showdown at the Mint, where the planes driven by Goldfinger's girls fly over and knock out the soliders with poison gas, took forever and seemed maddeningly slow to me. I am not a fan one of the main locations of the film, as the scenes at the stud farm near Fort Knox are weak compared to some of the many other exotic Bond locations in previous and later films. With all of this being said, I do recognize the historical significance of this film and I have plans to watch it again soon to take a "fresh" look.

Thunderball (Sean Connery, 1965)

This was really the film that brought the Bond gadgets to significance (his jet pack, for example). The plot it catchy (the terrorist group SPECTRE holds atomic bombs for ransom) and the film is known for it underwater, aquatic scenes, some of which are far too lengthy. But those underwater scenes were original for the time period and give this film unique character. The Bahamas locale gets a thumbs up, and the theme song by Tom Jones is one of the best. The villain (Largo) and Bond girl (Domino) are average at best. The pre-title sequence at the fallen British agent's funeral is very good. This is one film that doesn't have any really big downfalls, but its also not over-the-top excellent, either. Just a good, entertaining Bond film. 

You Only Live Twice (Sean Connery, 1967)

From the start of this film where Connery fakes Bond's murder in Hong Kong (hence the title of the film), this is an excellent film and perhaps one of the more underrated in the series. I am a big fan of the locations and sets in this film, from Hong Kong to M's submarine office to Blofeld's hollowed-out volcano layer. Speaking of Blofield, this film features the best "Blofeld' in any Bond movie (the character was in several different movies played by several different actors). This is the film with "Little Nellie", the flying mini helicopter/airplace/weapon of destruction (pictured above in the film poster). I have read some reviews that bash this film for it's hard-to-believe plot, namely Bond being transformed into a Japanese man via a half-assed plastic surgery job. I tend to agree, as the film tends to get more ridiculous as it goes on (the extremely-long Japanese wedding scene is forgettable). But with that being said, overall despite being a bit dated, it's still very good, highlighted by very cool Blofeld and his volcano layer. 

On Her Majesty's Secret Service (George Lazenby, 1969)

George Lazenby was an Australian model who had never acted before. Sounds like a perfect replacement for Sean Connery, right? This film is not nearly as bad as some people claim. It's relatively gadget and low-budget humor free. What I like about this one is how unique it is compared to other Bond films. It doesn't have a happy ending (it's tragic actually), Bond gets married, quits the SS and this is the first Bond film to reference past films. Bond archenemy Blofeld is featured again here, as the plot revolves his attempt to release a plague on Earth via brainwashed women, who is training in the Swiss Alps under the guise of an allergy clinic...I know, it sounds really far out. But it works. This film features two incredible chase scenes: One between Bond and Blofeld and his henchmen down a ski slope, and the second between Bond and Blofeld on a bobsled track. Very creative. Lazenby was a very different Bond then Sean Connery, so I don't think they can be compared. Had Lazenby been given a chance to do multiple Bond films, his legacy would have been much different than it is. For a guy with no acting experience, he did fairly well and this plot in this movie makes it worth watching. Be warned: this film is very "dated" as it SCREAMS 1967. 

Diamonds Are Forever (Sean Connery, 1971)

Of the 11 Bond films I have seen, this is my least favorite. Everything about this one is just off...from Sean Connery coming back to the series, looking like a bloated 55-year-old (he was just 41 at the time), to the cheesy, are they-or-are they not homosexual villains (Mr. Wint and Mr. Kidd) and the forgettable performance by Jimmy Dean (yes, of the sausage fame) as Willard Whyte, the eccentric Las Vegas tycoon. Two Bond girls grace this film, Tiffany Case and Plenty O'Toole. OK but nothing spectacular. This was the last major appearance of the Blofeld character, and rightfully so because it had run its course. This is the first Bond fim to heavily feature that "campy" humor tone I keep mentioning. It doesn't work here as it does in some of Roger Moore's Bond films. For me, there are two memorable scenes in this film: The car chase in downtown Las Vegas where Bond's red Mustang ends up sideways on two wheels, and the scene where Mr. Wint and Kidd attempt to cremate an alive Bond trapped inside a coffin. Two good scenes, but not enough to save this essentially forgettable mess. Not a good way to end the Sean Connery Bond era.

Live And Let Die (Roger Moore, 1973)

Now we're talking. My favorite of the first 11 Bond films for so many reasons. The Bond girl (an amazingly-beautiful Jane Seymour, in her first movie, as Solitare, the tarot-card reading fortune teller), the locations (Harlem, New Orelans and the fictional island of San Monique, the villain (Mr. Big, Tee Hee Johnson), the awesome theme song (by Paul McCartney and Wings), the title sequence (burning skulls) and the voodoo theme. I thought Roger Moore's first performance as Bond was refreshing. The critics point to the film's racial undertones, drug-trafficking plot and the annoying Cajun Sheriff Pepper. Both criticisms are right, but who cares?? This is entertainment and should be viewed as such. Thisfilm goes places where no other Bond film had gone in terms of the supernatural and voodoo theme. Did I mention the chainsaw wristwatch? Or Bond escaping a crocodile pond by skipping over them? Talk about a cool action scene. To sum it up, this film has it all. And I'll mention her again: Jane Seymour is absolutely stunning in her role.

The Man with The Golden Gun (Roger Moore, 1974)

This film sticks out for me because of Christopher Lee's performance as the villain, Scaramanga (The man with the golden gun). He is a paid assassin who charges $1 million per golden bullet. Of the films I have seen thus far, Scaramanga is the most effective villain, and the casting of Lee was perfect. Scaramanga's island fortress was also well done, as was the fun house he uses to lure in his enemies (he uses a fun house because he was in a circus as a child, and has three nipples, which is unrelated but worth mentioning). The Bond girl, Mary Goodnight (smoking hot), is my No. 2 behind Jane Seymour's Solitare. Scaramanga's little-person henchman named Nick Nack doesn't really work for me. One of my favorites parts is the use of the derelict former Atlanic Ocean liner, the RMS Queen Elizabeth, which is used as a top-secret MI6 base in the Hong Kong harbor. The interior of the sunken ship is used for the remote offices of M, Bond's boss. It was a nice touch in a film that could have been so much better with more serious action scenes, more Chistopher Lee, less Nick Nack, less (or none) of the Cajun Sheriff Pepper and less campy humor. The most forgettable moment of the film: Bond taking on an entire Kung-Fu school (I believe Kung-Fu was a big craze in 1974). 

The Spy Who Loved Me (Roger Moore, 1977)

I have mixed feelings about this film, which some say is the best Roger Moore Bond offering. I liked it about as much as TMWTGG but not nearly as much as LALD. What I liked: The opening sequence when Bond is skiing and goes off the cliff is pretty incredible. The Lotus Espirit Bond car that turns into a submarine is eye-popping. The use of Egypt and the Pyramids for part of the film's location was good. The Bond girl was nice (Triple-X, played by Barbara Bach, who is now Ringo Starr's wife). What I didn't like: the villains (Karl Stromberg, ruler of the underwater-hideout Atlantis) and Jaws, the metal-toothed giant who would reappear in the next film, Moonraker. The film seemed too long for me, but it was creative and the plot was easy to follow along with. And the humor was toned-down as the film had kind of a war-mission feel to it. 

Moonraker (Roger Moore, 1979)

The James Bond film series' answer to the Star Wars craze that had just hit the nation, Moonraker was entertaining because it ventured where no other Bond film had touched on (as far as a main plot line): Space. Unfortunately, Jaws makes his return, and in a terrible moment in the film, turns into a good guy, falls in love and saves Bond. It's so bad it almost ruins the film, which returns to the humorous overtones last seen in TMWTGG. The Bond girl is memorable for her name: Dr. Goodhead. I enjoyed the work of French actor Michael Lonsdale as the villain, Hugo Drax, who attempts to create a super race of humans and destroy all life on Earth. Aside from the space locale, Rio de Janeiro is used as a setting, as is Los Angeles and Venice. None are really memorable. As far as unmemorable goes, a gondola chase scene in Venice is ended when Bond's gondola jumps onto the street and turns into a hovercraft. Lame. The plot is far-fetched because of that absurd moment as well as a handful of others. It's not a total swing and miss, but this is not a Bond film that has aged well at all.

To be continued..