NFL Mock Draft 2.0

The second of my mock NFL draft, to reflect some trades and other moves made:

1. St. Louis Rams

Sam Bradford, QB, Oklahoma

- This is pretty elementary -- the Rams need a quarterback (especially with the release of starter Marc Bulger this week) 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. Previous pick: Bradford.

2. Detroit Lions

Ndamakong Suh, DT, Nebraska

- Suh is the guy that was the early favorite to go No.1 overall.  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. There are starting to be rumors of the Lions taking an offensive tackle. Previous pick: Suh

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. Previous pick: McCoy

4. Washington Redskins

Russell Okung, OT, Oklahoma State

- First big change from my first mock, as previous pick was QB Jimmy Clausen. That is no longer the expected scenario as the Skins just brought in Donovan McNabb. They still need a young, developmental QB but they can take one later in the draft now, or trade out of this slot if they so choose. Assuming they keep this pick, Okung makes the most sense. He's the best OT available, a guy the Skins can plug into Chris Samuels' old spot at left tackle.  Previous pick: Jimmy Clausen, QB, Notre Dame

5. Kansas City Chiefs

Brian Bulaga, OT, Iowa

- Yes, the Chiefs just recently drafted Branden Albert to play left tackle, but they can slide him over to the right side, or put Bulaga there. GM Scott Pioli is too smart to pass this opportunity up. Previous pick: Okung.

6. Seattle Seahawks

Trent Williams, OT, Oklahoma

- 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. With the departure of LT Walter Jones, the Seahawks can pick up a new left tackle and still address other needs, like running back, with their next first-round pick. This run of left tackles flying off the board is a direct result of the McNabb trade. Previous pick: CJ Spiller, RB, Clemson

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 Berry is gone, I could see the Browns trading out of this spot. Previous pick: Berry

8. Oakland Raiders

Anthony Davis, OT, Rutgers

- 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: Raiders need an OT and the guess here is that they'll be in awe of Davis' size (6-5, 323) and his athletic ability. He's also very raw, from what I've read.  Previous pick: Bulaga

9. Buffalo Bills

Jimmy Clausen, QB, Notre Dame

The Bills are another team that needs an offensive tackle, but with the elite guys gone, they can address the glaring hole at quarterback. Again, Clausen's slide is a direct result of McNabb to the Redskins. I'm not sold on Clausen as a franchise QB, but the Bills have little choice here. Previous pick: Trent Williams, OT, Oklahoma

10. Jacksonville Jaguars

Demaryius Thomas, WR, Georgia Tech

Lots of ways the Jaguars can go here. They desperately needed a pass rusher but took care of that via free agency (Aaron Kampman). Safety is also a big need.  But the team's receivers have been subpar for years as David Garrard doesn't really have anyone to throw to (and never has). Thomas' stock has risen significantly as we get into April. Previous pick: Dez Bryant, WR, Oklahoma State

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 Oklahoma State WR Dez Bryant, which would make even more sense if WR Brandon Marshall is dealt on draft day. Previous pick: McClain

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). Previous pick: Kindle

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. 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. Previous pick: Haden

14. Seattle Seahawks

CJ Spiller, RB, Clemson

With their second first-round pick, the Seahawks really fortunate as the best RB in the draft falls to them at No. 14. Spiller is a multi-faceted playmaker, as he can return kicks and punts. Previous pick: Derrick Morgan, DE, Georgia Tech

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. Previous pick: Witherspoon.

16. Tennessee Titans

Derrick Morgan, DE, Georgia Tech

This seems like a no-brainer, as the Titans lost DEs Kyle Vanden Bosch and Jevon Kearse. Morgan is the best end in this draft and may go higher. But in this scenario, he falls to Tennessee. Previous pick: Jason Pierre-Paul, DE, South Florida

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. Previous pick: Iupati

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 Boldin. The Steelers have been weak at corner for years, so this makes the most sense. Previous pick: Wilson

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. Previous pick: Graham

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). Previous pick: Williams.

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 Dez Bryant may be too enticing to pass up. Previous pick: Mays

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. Previous pick: Odrick.

23. Green Bay Packers

Maurkice 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. Previous pick: Pouncey

24. Philadelphia Eagles

Earl Thomas, S, Texas
Another pick tough to handicap. Eagles have needs at offensive line, defensive end and the secondary. Thomas is too good of a talent to slip much further. But like I said, this one is a pure guess. Previous pick: Everson Griffen, DE, Southern Cal

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. Previous pick: Dunlap

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. Previous pick: Gresham. 

27. Dallas Cowboys

Dez Bryant, WR, Oklahoma State
Jerry Jones loves athletes and playmakers, and although Thomas has had some off-the-field incidents, let's not kid ourselves: Jones doesn't care. The Cowboys need offensive line depth, as they released LT Flozell Adams last week, but there will some quality choices in the second round. Previous pick: Earl Thomas.

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. Previous pick: Matthews.

29. New York Jets

Brian Price, DT, UCLA

- I know the Jets need more weapons on offense for QB Mark Sanchez, but the way this mock is unfolding, there isn't anyone available at this slot that would make sense, value-wise. So they address their defensive line with Price, who is being compared to Warren Sapp. Previous pick: Demaryius Thomas.

30. Minnesota Vikings
Patrick Robinson, CB, Florida State

- Price would be the ideal fit here, but cornerback is also a position of need in Minnesota. Previous pick: Brian Price.

31. Indianapolis Colts

Devin McCourty, CB, Rutgers
The Colts cut nickel cornerback Tim Jennings, so they fill that need here with a guy in McCourtey that has seen his stock rise since the Senior Bowl. Previous pick: Anthony Davis.

32. New Orleans Saints

Jerry Hughes, DE/LB, TCU

- The Saints can plug Hughes into a of couple different positions of need. Hughes may not slip this far, but in this scenario he does and the Super Bowl champs get a steal. Previous pick: Hughes

Dissecting the ESPN column on why LeBron MUST head to New York

Just this week, ESPN launched its latest web site strictly marketed to a specific city's sports market: ESPN NewYork.com. The site debuted in the middle of the week, and as one could imagine, two of the more promoted articles on the new site revolved around LeBron James and a potential move to the New York Knicks on July 1, when he becomes an unrestricted free agent.

One of the articles was by The Plain Dealer's Brian Windhorst, who wrote a fine piece that discussed the differences between "Cleveland LeBron" and "New York LeBron."  Windhorst's story is a very balanced one, providing logical reasons why it makes sense for LeBron to stay in Cleveland and why it makes sense to go to New York. I highly recommend reading it, as I do all of Brian's Cavaliers' coverage.

Then there's the second LeBron piece on ESPN NewYork.com.
This one, by former New York-area newspaper columnist Ian O'Connor, provides reasons why LeBron's only choice is New York.  I won't completely summarize O'Connor's column (an opinion column, just to be clear), just click on the link and read it. Please.

Here's the basics: O'Connor lists reasons why he thinks LBJ should be NYC-bound, and he quotes several "New York icons" that provide quotes why LeBron should and will come to New York.

Though well-written (O'Connor is a very good writer), the column is littered with several instances of flawed rationale, weird, irrelevant quotes from these New York sports icons, bogus reasoning on O'Connor's part and much pure speculation and fantasy with no factual basis. It's also completely and unabashedly New York-biased, but that's a product of where the column is written for: New York and New York sports fans. So I am OK with that bias.

Before I lay out the problems I have with O'Connor's column, I'd like to clarify my position on this matter (LeBron and free agency and the Knicks) and identify my own biases:

1. I have no idea what LeBron will do on July 1 and offer no predictions, as I believe it is impossible to do so because I truly believe LeBron himself doesn't know right now.
2. I do not get offended when I see "Photoshop-ed" pictures of LeBron in a Knicks uniform (like the one pictured above from ESPN NewYork.com). I do not get offended when people predict LeBron will bolt because Cleveland sucks. I do not get offended when the New York media bashes in Cleveland as a city and sports town. I will not swear off professional sports if LeBron does leave Cleveland. This is a business, folks and it has happened in sports dozens of times.
3. I want LeBron to stay in Cleveland, obviously, and will be ecstatic if he does.

So now you know where I stand on the basic issues of this "situation". Now, on to the almost comical flaws of Ian O'Connor's column. I am going to select some passages from the column and my responses to these passages will be listed below each:

I'll start with the passage that really got to me...One of the most ludicrous, outlandish, false and plain stupid things I have ever read:

* (O'Connor in his conclusion: (LeBron) can live the dream night after night after night. He can own New York the way Jordan owned Chicago and Kobe owns L.A. He can be bigger than his cherished Yankees, bigger than everyone from No. 2 (Jeter) back to No. 3 (Ruth).

1. Yes, LeBron could own New York like Jordan ruled Chicago or Kobe rules L.A....if he wins quickly and wins a lot quickly. Jordan owned Chicago after a couple of championships. Same for Kobe in L.A. 

But what happens if LeBron signs a five-year deal with the Knicks and they lose in the first round of the playoffs every year and then he leaves New York? Or they lose in the East finals, even the NBA Finals, once or twice? How about if they ... gasp... miss the playoffs (gasp)? Will he still rule New York? Or will the fans get restless? After all, isn't a winning team all they want?

These fans have had players who can score tons of points, dish out tons of assists, get rebounds and throw down sick dunks. And these fans are portrayed as miserable, tortured masses. So does that mean all of a sudden, in comes LeBron and they're happy, win or lose? How does that work? Just because he's a showman, a magician with the basketball and fun to watch, he gets a pass if he doesn't deliver a championship? I love LeBron. But he hasn't proven he can win a title in six tries. What makes people think a title is guaranteed in New York? Even winning seasons for that matter? How many games can LeBron win himself each year? 20-25? Who is going to win the other 20 to make the Knicks a .500 team? How about the other 30 to guarantee a playoff spot? And yes, I know LeBron makes the players around him better. 

2. Did O'Connor really say LeBron can be bigger than the Yankees, bigger than Babe Ruth? 

This is where O'Connor's bias goes from doing his job writing for a New York web site to just plain craziness. I'm sorry, but what would LeBron have to do be "bigger" than the Yankees? Or "bigger" than Babe Ruth?  Win 20 titles and score 50 points per game, for 10 years? How can you possibly make a statement like that? I have no idea what O'Connor is trying to do here. 

3. The Yankees have 27 championships and more history and tradition than arguably any professional sports team. And Babe Ruth is an American icon, not just a baseball icon. And the NBA is not Major League Baseball. And the Knicks are not the Yankees. And some people who think Babe Ruth is the "biggest" athlete ever don't care about LeBron James. And vice versa. And none of that is even relevant. You are comparing two totally different sports, two totally different people and two totally different levels of celebrity and impact. Babe Ruth is "big" for probably 100 reasons that LeBron can never be. And LeBron is "big' for probably 100 reasons that Babe Ruth could have never been.

4. I hate to beat dead horse... but... Did Ian O'Connor really say LeBron can be "bigger" than the Yankees? I have a feeling Ian O'Connor read that after this column was posted and felt very ... stupid. 

* Instead of directly pitching New York to LeBron, Ian O'Connor talks to five chosen people "So the pitch to LeBron belongs to more prominent voices."
1. Those five people: Hall of Famer and beloved former Knick Willis Reed, former NHL star and New York Ranger Mark Messier (yes, a hockey player), former Madison Square Garden president Dave Checketts, former Yankee great Reggie Jackson and current Yankee general manager Brian Cashman.
OK. What an....odd group of New York personalties. I guess O'Connor couldn't get Cosmo Kramer, The Nanny, Andy Sipowicz, the hot detective from Law and Order SVU, David Wright, Eli Manning, Mark Sanchez, Spike Lee or Donald Trump.

* O'Connor quotes Willis Reed: "I really hope ... LeBron's wearing a New York Knickerbockers uniform. That's my wish. I mean, do you want to win a championship in New York or Sacramento?"
What does Sacramento have to do with any of this and why is it relevant?

* (In the section of the column when O'Connor talks to NHL icon Mark Messier): Messier, who is currently special assistant to Rangers GM Glen Sather, is the Greek god of hockey, just as LeBron James is the Greek god of hoops. The one who ended a 54-year drought wants the other to try to end a drought at 37 years and counting.
1. I am not an NHL fan. Not a hockey fan. But since when did Mark Messier become the "greek god of hockey" exactly? And what does that mean? And who christened LeBron as the "greek god of hoops" exactly? If there was such a mythical creature, wouldn't it be Michael Jordan? The best player ever? That analogy is big swing and miss.
2. I have a major issue with O'Connor's statement that LeBron may want to go to the Knicks to "try to end a drought at 37 years and counting." Say the Knicks get LeBron, but aren't able to add another superstar free agent (Chris Bosh, Dwyane Wade). Assume that next season, it's LeBron, the current sorry Knicks roster and maybe another addition or two. I guarantee the Knicks will not compete for a championship next season or the two-to-three seasons following. The current team is beyond awful, a mis-mash of wing scorers, shooters and their coach, Mike D'Antoni doesn't believe in defense or scouting the opposition, literally. It is near impossible to win long-term in the NBA trying to outscore people every night and forgetting defense. So even with LeBron, that 37-year title drought for the Knicks isn't going to end anytime soon.

* (In the section of the column where O'Connor talks to former Madison Square Garden president and former Knicks executive Dave Checketts): The Knicks can't sell a credible product right now, Checketts reasoned, so they have to sell the benefits the city offers to baseball and football stars who have bathed in a ticker-tape rain. "When you win in New York you are immortalized," Checketts said. "LeBron will win in Cleveland if he stays and be revered for a long time, but it still wouldn't equal what winning one or several in New York would mean to him. I've been gone from the Garden almost nine years, and there's a reason I've never moved back home [to Utah]. I still have my office on Park Avenue. If LeBron ever does go to the Knicks, he'll find out there isn't a better place in the free world than New York."
1. As far as selling the tangible "benefits" of New York to LeBron: Basically worthless. Here's a newsflash: LeBron is filthy rich. Filthy rich. And he will get richer and richer. He has his own private jet. He can (and does) go to New York City any time he wants. Clubs, nightspots, restaurants, whatever. He could buy a Park Avenue penthouse. Or 50 Park Avenue penthouses. He could live in New York and fly to Cleveland on game days (just like Zydrunas Ilgauskas does right now).
2. Is that the same as actually living there, being part of the fiber of the city? I guess not. But it's close enough and if you read a lot about LeBron, you know he loves where he lives in Ohio, loves his dream house he just had built and loves to be comfortable in his surroundings. By staying in Cleveland, he can have all of that and go to New York every night and live the city life if he chooses.
3. As far as a title meaning more that is won in New York opposed to Cleveland: Wrong. Again, if you know anything about LeBron, you know that he badly wants to bring a title to Cleveland, his home town. It would mean the world to him. He has said as much several times. He takes pride in where he is from and I really believe he wants to establish a dynasty in Cleveland.

* (In the section where O'Connor talks to Yankee legend Reggie Jackson): .....In 1977, (with the Yankees) Jackson hit three World Series homers on three consecutive Game 6 pitches thrown by three different Dodgers arms. What would've been the impact on Jackson's legacy had he delivered that epic performance in the colors of, say, the Cleveland Indians? "It would be significantly smaller," Mr. October said. So would two or three LeBron titles in New York be bigger than four or five LeBron titles in Cleveland? I'd definitely agree with that," said Jackson. "If Jordan won four in New York rather than six in Chicago, he'd be even bigger than he is now."
1. How can Michael Jordan be possibly bigger than he is now? I think it's safe to say Jordan's six titles in Chicago, which inlcudes a remarkable four-peat, are universally regarded as a huge historical achievement.And ask Michael Jordan if he would prefer six titles or four.
2. "Yankees superior to Indians" equals "Knicks superior to Cavaliers." Wrong. Try again, Mr. O'Connor. The Knicks are not Yankees. Winning a title for the Knicks and adding that title to the Knicks' history is not the same as winning a title for the Yankees and adding that title to the Yankees history. Would Reggie Jackson's legacy been less impactful had he performed his World Series heroics with the Indians rather than the Yankees? Probably, but that depends on your viewpoint. Will LeBron's legacy be greater if he wins championships (one or multiple) in New York and not Cleveland? Possibly. But depends on your viewpoint. In the last 37 years, the Cavs have had almost as much success as the Knicks. In the past 10 years? The Cavs and Knicks are not even in the same league. The point is, the Yankees-Indians, Knicks-Cavliers comparsion doesn't work. Apples and oranges. And trying to put the Yankees and Knicks on the same level, as far as overall historical significance and success goes, is a massive stretch. Maybe the better comparison would have been how playing in Madison Square Garden and Yankee Stadium is different than playing anywhere else. That works.

* In the section where O'Connor talks to Yankees general manager Brian Cashman: "If you accomplish something in New York," Cashman said, "it's better than anywhere else."
1. I have a problem with blanket statements like this one by Cashman. And again, I am not sure what Cashman is talking about is the case in the NBA. Does that mean the Lakers' championships would have been "better" had then been in New York? Uh, no. How about the Celtics' championship two years ago? The Celtics are one of the most stories and successful franchises in professional sports. Would that championship in 2008 have been "better"  had it been in New York? No. Makes no sense...unless you live in New York or are from there. But the same can be said about any city, any country, anwhere. It's always "better" if it happens to you or your city or your team. Right? Why is that a reason for LeBron to play for the Knicks? Another swing and miss.

* Above is ESPN.com photo illustration

Coming late Saturday/early Sunday

On the new web site, ESPN New York.com, columnist Ian O'Connor wrote this piece about why LeBron James' only choice is to leave Cleveland and go to the New York Knicks this summer. 

Here's the link: http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/columns/story?page=oconnor/lebron-james/100402

I am working on a post that will point out the major flaws in the column, as I think people who read this blog will really find interesting. So check back later. And read that column.

Good column on Yankees-Red Sox rivalry

Sunday night marks Opening Night for the 2010 baseball season, and what better way to kick off the season than a Yankees-Red Sox matchup? Well, that's what we get, Sunday night on ESPN2 (8 p.m.).
Here's a good piece from MLB.com columnist Mike Bauman on the Yankees-Sox rivalry. He discusses what the rivalry means in terms of 2010, why the rivalry is significant and other interesting stuff. Give it a read.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20100402&content_id=9053968&vkey=news_nyy&fext=.jsp&c_id=nyy&partnerId=rss_nyy

Update on Cavs' playoff stuff

Updating a previous post on the potential Eastern Conference playoff matchups......


Here's the NBA conference standings (through Wednesday's games)

* If the season ended today, the Cavaliers would get the No. 1 seed in the East and the top seed overall, meaning they'd get home court advantage in every playoff series, including the Finals, against any team. Continuing with this current scenario, the Cavs would matchup with the No. 8 seed Raptors in the first round. The Raptors are two games in front of the Bulls for that final East playoff spot, and are two games back of the Bobcats for the No. 7 spot.
Odds are the Raptors stay in the 8th spot, as they aren't playing that well (5-5 in last 10)...good news for them is that the team chasing, the Bulls (4-6 last 10), are playing even worse.
As I said in my previous post on this subject, I think the Raptors are the ideal first-round playoff matchup for the Cavs, despite their considerable size. Especially if the other choice is the Bobcats, who are scary athletic and play defense. My reason for this rationale? The Raptors are a horrid defensive team, allowing 105.3 points per game. Want some perspective? Let's compare:

Raptors: 105.3 points allowed per game, last in East
Warriors: 112.5 points allowed per game, last in West and last in NBA
Cavaliers: 94.8 fourth in East, 6th in NBA
Bobcats: 93.6 points per game, 1st in East and 1st in NBA

* The other side of that is the Raptors can score, as they average 105.3 points per game. They are also third in the league in 3-point shooting. With that being said, I still like the Cavs in a seven-game series. The majority of the time, especially in the first round of the playoffs, better defensive teams win. Of course there are exceptions (recall the Golden State Warriors' playoff run in the 2006-07 season; defense was a rumor on that team but they could outscore anyone easily).

* So let's assume the Cavs get past the Raptors, I'd guess in five games. The second-round matchup would be with either No. 4 seed Boston or No. 5 seed Milwaukee.
Both are intriguing matchups for the Cavs, for good and bad reasons.
Let's start with the Bucks.
The Cavs won three of the teams' four meetings, as the Bucks got a win when the Cavs were minus LeBron James. In two of the three Cavs' wins, the Bucks were right there until the end, including Tuesday's game, which the Cavs may have won thanks to an official-reviewed call. Milwaukee is a deep, talented team that boasts playoff veterans (Jerry Stackhouse, Kurt Thomas), exciting young players (Brandon Jennings), good shooters (John Salmons) and the second-best center in the East (Andrew Bogut). I wouldn't be shocked if a Cavs-Bucks series went six, or even seven, games. I'd still give the overall series advantage to the Cavs, as the Bucks also struggle with defense at times and simply don't have the weapons and experience and knowledge the Cavs have. But they are close and are dangerous.

* As far as the Celtics...what more can be said? They are old and slow and are falling in the standings (they won't fall past the No. 4 seed in the East). The Cavs have blown out the Celtics twice in three meetings and play again on Sunday. The Celtics just don't strike fear into me like other teams, say the Magic, do. I don't think the Cavs would sweep the Celtics, but I don't see how Boston could compete with the Cavs in seven games, barring a complete meltdown by the Cavs or some unforseen injury or horrible slump by LeBron.

* The Cavs' magic number to clinch the top seed in the East and the top seed in the NBA is two games...there' been talk about resting the starters down the stretch. Without going into a lengthy analysis or discussion, I will say plain and simple: I am in favor of it, 100 percent. When those top seeds are clinched, rest the starters (LeBron, Jamison, Mo, and Shaq if he returns) in the fourth quarter, even the whole second half if necessary. I am a firm believer in having your top players rested, refreshed and injury-free heading into the playoffs. No question.

* Photo courtesy of Getty Images