Two Seasons

Some quarters in a college career are useless and some are hard and SOME are both. For one of my roommates this year, Fall Quarter appeared to be both.

Nick became a fan of the Cavs mainly because living with John Glenn and I gave him almost no choice in the matter. After watching them for a few games and with the quarter wearing on him, he made this statement: "I think I'm just going to live vicariously through the Cavs."

My response: "Oh yeah...I already do that."

I'm so into this team that when they lose, I almost always go PLAY basketball to try to atone for everything they did wrong. It's so stupid...but it's not.

This Cavaliers team is so likable. They have the best player and the best leader in basketball although many refuse to acknowledge either. Many of their players are ridiculed regularly (Shaq, Ilgauskas, Mo Williams, Delonte West, Daniel Gibson, Anderson Varejao...) yet all have contributed greatly to this fantastic start to the season, especially against the top teams. This is frankly one of the most under appreciated juggernauts ever. It's perfect.

It's perfect because of this:

Shaq has not said anything noteworthy this season. He really has not done anything spectacular in the arenas of statistics or show-stopping moments. The consensus is that the "Shaq Experiment" is a failure and they are better with him off the court, yet Shaq, one of the proudest men in the NBA, remains silent. We did hear from him Christmas afternoon however, when he shoved it up the Lakers' asses.

I actually watched that game on mute once I saw that Mark Jackson, Mike Breen and Jeff Van Gundy were doing it. I'm sure Kobe got his share of praise after being thrashed on his own home court and jacking up 32 shots in the process but, if it's all the same to you, I don't need to hear about how great it is to do that (I already know how great it is...).

But let me address the Shaq situation for a brief second...

The Cleveland front office are not a bunch of rubes who are oblivious to what is going on in the league, yet they are treated as such by everyone. The consensus on television is that people think the Cavs brought Shaq to be a second banana to LeBron which is false. They brought him in because they had not one player who could guard the giant Centers in the league (Dwight Howard and the Gasol/Bynum monster) and be more man than them. And, so far, he's doing it. He frustrated the shit out of Dwight and the Lakers and Cleveland won both games handily on the road against the teams they simply could not handle last season. The Cavs also lead the league in points in the paint given up where they struggled last season. I'm not saying the Championship is a given by any means or that Shaq won't end up being a failure even by my standards, but as of now, he's been absolutely what the Cavs wanted him to be. I hope this is the last time we'll have to have this discussion.

The Cavs' other lovable giant, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, might be coming upon more hard times. After not getting into the game where he was set to break the Cavs' record for games played, he may yet have to stomach another indignity.

If the Cavs are going to make any trade this season (for the record, I don't believe they have to), it will almost certainly involve Ilgauskas because of his expiring contract. The bright spot in this situation is that a team looking to save money (the only type of team who would want to make this type of trade) would almost certainly offer Ilgauskas a buyout and subsequently make his return to Cleveland. It would however bring another series of blows to his already bruised ego.

After nothing but toughness and loyalty to a Cleveland organization that, until recently, deserved neither, Zydrunas seems to be the whipping boy for the most promising year in Cavs history. He lost his starting job, was benched on his big day, and now will most likely not only be traded, but bought out by a crappy team because they don't need him. If anyone can take it, it is probably Big Z, but if he takes all these bullets for the Cavs and ends up contributing to a title, his number absolutely must be retired and he must be given any and all courtesies by the Cleveland organization.

Now, in a shocking transition, I will explain how Zydrunas Ilgauskas and the Cincinnati Bengals are exactly the same.

Zydrunas Ilgauskas was a first round pick of one of the worst and least relevant NBA franchises around. Listening to someone explain what Zydrunas Ilgauskas plays like and his dimensions and where he comes from...the whole lot of it...would make you think two words: "Obvious bust."

And, in most cases, you'd be right.

There is nothing inherently dominant about his game...nothing about him that entitles him to points (like Shaq, for instance). He has terrible feet and missed seasons literally having doctors build him new ones. But through it all, he stayed tough and stayed loyal and kept making his 15-footers, shots that take practice, concentration and calmness. Big Z was a pick made by an incompetent organization that should have failed, but they lucked out because of the person Z is.

Likewise, the Cincinnati Bengals are a notoriously hideous organization. They drafted a stiff Heisman-winning quarterback who really only had one good season in college (Carson Palmer), vultured the defensive coordinator off of a Super Bowl team (Marvin Lewis) and took a chance on a troubled wideout (Chad Johnson). Do these sound like savvy moves by a bunch of geniuses? These are the moves consistently made by people who have no scouts and are essentially drafting on what they see on TV. The twist is this: Carson Palmer, Chad Johnson and Marvin Lewis all turned out to be good enough (although all of them very obviously flawed) but most importantly, they all seem to share a love for lost causes. It's the only explanation, really. I'll say this one last time before Saturday's game against the Jets...The Bengals are not very good. Like the Cavs win Ilgauskas, Cincy lucked out not just with the caliber of players they drafted, but the type of characters they got and, win or lose, that needs to appreciated.

NFL Playoffs: Wildcard

DALLAS COWBOYS over Philidelphia Eagles

ARIZONA CARDINALS over Green Bay Packers

CINCINNATI BENGALS over NY Jets

Baltimore Ravens over NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS

Just the way we planned it...

Other than the fact that my internet is going so slow that I'm having a hard time following my beloved Windhorst Beat Blog, the Cavaliers' season has gone just about as well as it could have and a lot of people deserve credit.

After watching Shaq and Varejao start every game together for the first week or so and how nauseating the offense looked, I wrote this email to Brian Windhorst (which he has yet to respond to):

"Brian, I need some help here.

I believe that last year's starting lineup should remain our lineup this year for the following reasons:

The people in question of whether or not they should start are Parker/West, Hickson/Varejao and, perhaps the most controversial, O'Neal/Ilgauskas.

1. Starting shooting guards in the NBA have made a living destroying guys like Anthony Parker in their careers. Parker is a good player and a better traditional shooting guard than Delonte West (I guess) but that is what the Joe Johnsons of the world are used to and are comfortable beating. Delonte West is so annoying to these guys because his whole goal is to bother them. Delonte doesn't appear to care about his stats (or even really his physical well being) when he plays, he just tries to bother the other team's best scorer. On the flip-side, Anthony Parker is an intelligent player who can probably outsmart most backup shooting guards and could score off the bench which we just didn't do last year when the going got tough in the playoffs.

2. This is obviously not an issue as to who is better because, while Hickson gets the nod in athletic ability, Varejao is very effective whether he comes off the bench or starts and is undoubtedly the better player as we stand today. The only issue here for me is that Andy plays better with Z and it seems like JJ would play better with Shaq. I guess Mike Brown has addressed that issue by starting JJ with Shaq but that is not the direction I would go, but at least that means he is evaluating the situation instead of just blindly starting the "best" players. My opinion on this is more affected by who the starting center is than anything else so I'll just leave it at that.

3. Here's the big one.

The whole off season I kept hearing about how great Zydrunas was going to be against backup Centers and I never bought that. In all honesty, Z isn't really playing against the other teams' centers at all. He's rarely just trying to beat his guy in the post but he is often playing off of LeBron's drives hitting jumpers so I'm really not sure if who is playing center for the other team really matters to him offensively. If anything, starting centers would probably be annoyed that they have to follow this goofball out to 20 or so feet which is always a good thing. On the other side of this coin, Shaq, I believe, would very much benefit from facing backup centers. The backups in this league are often younger guys and therefore, not as physically developed. These guys simply couldn't handle Shaq physically, I don't think. Also, this would give the second team a guy who needs to be double teamed (at least at times) or, if nothing else, a guy who they could go to when they were having trouble getting buckets, which was often the case last year with our bench. I also believe Z's game is much more affected by rhythm than Shaq's which is just another reason I would rather have Z start. He's spent the last however many years learning to play off LeBron and now we're taking that away from him.

I'm sorry for the length of this email, but I still feel like this roster is without question capable of being a great team but we're basically playing with our hands tied behind our backs when we have our three guys in Mo, LeBron and Shaq on the court to start the game, all of whom like to possess the ball, and have a bunch of guys who would really compliment either LeBron or Shaq playing together without either one of them on the floor.

I know that this team failed against the top teams in the NBA, but the starting lineup was almost always good. We routinely had the lead after the first quarter against L.A. and Orlando, but our bench let us down and we couldn't sustain our breakneck pace that was our only advantage against Orlando and we had to just murder LeBron with overuse in order to come close to closing out those games. Wouldn't it be smart to save one of our two guys that we can just go to to initiate to offense for the bench instead of leaving them out to dry like last season as well as stepping on the toes of Mo Williams?

I would like to know your opinion on this and whether or not it is being discussed as an option, although regardless of either, I still think it's what the Cavs should be doing.

Thanks."

Since Brian is apparently too busy to answer such a loyal reader's email, I guess I'll have to do it myself.

Hey, Buddies:

Chill.

You had a few good points there. You definitely noticed early on that Varejao and Shaq should never be on the floor together but you didn't plan on one thing: JJ Hickson is a different player when he gets to play with LeBron James. He's a dunk machine with a jumper. He's like Amar'e Staudemire if his coach ever told him to attempt to play defense. He's honestly one of the the rare supporting players LeBron has had that has legit talent in a traditional sense and he's showing that he can be on the court for an extended period of time without ruining everything. Also, Z seems to be adjusting well to coming off the bench as well as randomly starting when Shaq has phantom injuries. Problem number 1? Solved.

Another thing you were right about was how dumb it is to have lineups without one of these three people on the court: Mo Williams, Shaq'uille O'Neal, or LeBron James. Without one of these three, the team is left with zero primary playmakers on the floor which is a disaster. Mike Brown has since adjusted himself by giving Mo his break late in the first and bringing him back to start the second when LeBron and Shaq hit the bench. Solved.

Another thing Mike Brown deserves credit for his how he has handled Delonte West, and the solution to this problem is perfect for Mike Brown's style because the solution is to basically do nothing. Delonte's mood seems to swing for absolutely no reason; when he's good, he's great and when he's bad, he's useless. And what has Mike Brown done? He hasn't cut him, traded him or written him off on his bad days and he hasn't begun to start him after one good game. He plays him to start the second quarter and if he has it he sticks with him and if he doesn't he goes to Jamario Moon or Boobie Gibson or some combination of both and there's really not a huge problem because the regular season doesn't matter. Let the record show, however, that when right, Delonte West is a superior player to both of those guys, no offense to them.

I would like to thank you for your very well-written and weirdly long ass email.

Brian.

Was that so hard?