The light at night

Following a winning Cleveland team is a sensory experience for me.

It's more than just flashes of pixel-color in the squared off world of the TV set. It's more than e-mail banter at the office or picking up the newspaper to see the day's headline after a big win.

To me, it's all five senses. The team colors visible around town, the music that marks the era, the smells and tastes on the air, how the air feels against your skin. Not just at the ballpark or arena, but in day to day life. It's more than just a season of dreams. It's a series of snapshots in time taken through all my senses. I want to drink it all in and hold it, so I can pull it back out and live it again in a future daydream.

When the Indians were a force in the 1990s, October would signal its arrival with shorter days and chilly nights that seemed to add to the electricity around town, particularly in the mid-'90s when winning was new and exciting. It did something to the air. It wasn't just the drop in temperature. The air felt different. It smelled different. Anticipation made it different.

Growing up as a Yankees fan in New York, Billy Crystal used to refer to it as "World Series weather." Of course, that was back in the days before playoffs decided the league pennants each year. Now, World Series weather is also the property of the ALCS and NLCS, maybe even a few divsion series games if a cold front hits the right area.

What is climatologically true in New York is also true in Cleveland or any other city in the country's northern tiers. Maybe we'd have the same feelings if we were all living in Florida as Marlins and Rays fans, and the baseball playoffs occurred in the same cloak of heat and humidity that drapes itself over most of the regular season. But I don't think it would. Maybe that's just my cold-weather upbringing talking.

The crisp nights and shorter days make cities like Cleveland snap to attention, out of the lazy late-summer doldrums and into the here-and-now of a championship run.

Following the Cavs through a couple of deep playoff runs, and gearing up for what might be the deepest run in team history, I've spent the past few springs looking for the same feelings that I used to get in the Octobers of my more formative years.

Can there be an October in May and June? It turns out, there can be.

The feeling is there, with a reversal of the weather. Just like the October chill brings something extra to a pennant chase, the spring thaw brings new excitement to a contending basketball season. Night basketball games with daylight starts mean something. It's spring. Your team is in the playoffs. If you're so fortunate, you team might still be playing when shorts and t-shirt weather arrives.

Basketball on the precipice of summer is the best kind. It the kind that fans in just two or four cities get a chance to experience each year. It's national-stage basketball -- heck, world-stage basketball. It's an experience just to touch the hem on its garment, especially in a city like Cleveland, where something that big can't possibly be ignored.

In 2007, on the off-day between Games 3 and 4 of the NBA Finals, I made it a point to head downtown just to see the pomp and circumstance, the giant inflatable Larry O'Brien Trophy out on the plaza next to The Q, all the signage, the souvenir stands. I wanted to be a part of basketball's biggest stage on a warm June night. The Cavs were in an 0-3 hole and about to be swept, but I just wanted to take it all in. A lot of fans had the same idea. Hundreds stood, watched, took pictures, lapped the Q to take in the whole scene.

It was something of a pilgrimage by fans who had never experienced the NBA Finals before. They wanted to drink it all in, because who knows when the circus is going to come to town again.

This is basketball, away from winter's grasp, just like baseball removed from summer's embrace. Every time it comes around, it means something different. Something unpredictable. Something that rallies the whole city.

Something, we endlessly hope, will someday produce a title, a trophy, and a parade attended by thousands.

A strange equation

What do you get when mix two potential starting quarterbacks with a depleted-by-design receiving corps, and top it off with the mentoring of Brett Favre?

It's kind of hard to tell, but we might find out this summer. What we do know it that the long, strange saga of the Cleveland Browns might become palpably more interesting in the next six months, if not more successful.

If nothing else, Eric Mangini is walking to his own beat as the guru of Browns football operations. He's scrapping the receiving unit with little indication of what is to follow. Kellen Winslow is gone, Joe Jurevicius is gone, Braylon Edwards' name has reportedly come up in trade talks, and David Patten has made his triumphant return to Cleveland.

Oh, yeah -- Donte Stallworth killed a man with his car, too. That adds another layer of complexity to the matter of who is going to be catching passes for the Browns this fall.

While the receving unit withers away, Mangini and GM George Kokinis are apparently committed to returning both Derek Anderson and Brady Quinn to training camp this summer, and letting the pair battle it out for the starting job in an open competition.

If this isn't a rebuild, it sure as heck feels like one. Mangini is throwing two quarterbacks against the proverbial wall to see which one sticks better. If Edwards is jettisoned, neither one will have much to work with in the way of playmaking receivers, thanks to the "remodeling -- pardon our dust" sign hung on the entire unit.

Unless Mangini has some unforeseen tricks up his sleeve, 2009 looks to be a season of discovery for the new Browns regime. And by discovery, I mean lots of tinkering coupled with losing as Mangini tries to figure out how to piece together a winning organization from a hybrid of his personnel and Phil Savage's personnel. The result for '09 will be some kind of transitional, mutant football team.

It's perhaps the most maddening part of a regime change -- all the truths that we as fans have already found to be self-evident need to be proven all over again to the new guys in charge. We already know that Anderson completes underneath passes with the same velvety touch as a jackhammer. We already know Jamal Lewis will cry to the media when he doesn't get his totes. We already know Kamerion Wimbley is a one-trick pass rushing pony. Mangini and Kokinis have yet to discover some, or all, of these things. Film can give you an idea of what you're getting yourself into, but until a coach has actually watched his players in action, it's hard to pass accurate judgments.

For the fans who have watched the pathetic football parade of the past 10 years, however, we can go ahead and flip to the back page of the novel. We already know the answers to the questions.

Perhaps the most glaring evidence that Mangini is still feeling his way along is the news on Wednesday that he has reportedly asked Brett Favre to come to Cleveland as a quarterback consultant, helping to perhaps tutor Anderson and Quinn, or maybe simply to help Mangini sort through the oncoming QB controversy.

It would be a thrill in many ways to have one of modern era's truly elite quarterbacks in camp, wearing the team colors, imparting years of knowledge onto the Browns' pair of young signal-callers. But the backfire potential is also great.

It's hard to envision Favre accepting a background role. Maybe he would. Maybe he's finally content with his decision to retire. I'd rather labor under the assumption that once a waffler, always a waffler. And the last thing the Browns need in camp is two young QBs and an aging QB who has once again caught the football bug.

Don't just imagine Brett Favre in a Browns uniform. Imagine the firestorm of media coverage and heaven knows what else that would descend on Browns camp if Favre suddenly decided that he enjoyed playing for Mangini, if he decided that the best way to solve the Browns' QB problem is to strap on a helmet and take the field. Who is going to deny him, especially in an organization desperate for success and positive PR?

Imagine Anderson and Quinn stapled to the bench because Favre, once again, couldn't let the spotlight go, and try to tell me that would be healthy for the Browns organization in the long run.


Maybe I'm jumping way ahead of myself, but Favre has already backtracked once. Even if he is 100 percent retired, Favre would still overshadow a great deal of the goings-on at Browns camp by his mere presence, even if he's just wearing a cap and t-shirt and pacing the sidelines.

Favre has a lot of information that could be valuable to a young quarterback. Maybe he could help Mangini sort out this two-horse race. But there are too many plot threads dangling out there for me to think it would be as simple as Favre coming to town and teaching Mangini's young charges the ABC's of winning in the NFL.

At this point, it's all speculation. You could still color me surprised if Favre is in town at the start of training camp. But there is a little food for thought to go along with the intrigue.

When you step back and take it all in -- the dismantling of the receiving corps, the decision to stick with both Anderson and Quinn, the invitation extended to Favre -- it's a curious equation that might only make sense to Mangini and Kokinis at this point. But whether or not it makes sense to fans and scribes in March is immaterial. The bottom line is, it has to lead to wins on Autumn Sundays, if not this year, then certainly next year.

As long as there is a method to the madness, I'm willing to give it a chance. In eras past, we placed our hope in a long line of leaders who we thought had a grand plan, only to find out that Carmen Policy was a glorified mouthpiece, Butch Davis had paranoia issues and Phil Savage was out of his element as an administrator.

Maybe Mangini, Kokinis and their offbeat 2+0+1 equation is exactly what the doctor ordered. It certainly can't be worse than anything presented to us by Policy, Davis or Savage, right? Right?

All eyes on 65

Rules are made to be broken, history is created to be rewritten at a later date. But as we watch the Cavaliers stride down the home stretch of what has been to this point a magic carpet ride of a season, we can keep our eyes on one near-certainty that has been proven time and again in the NBA:

Teams that win 65 games during the regular season almost always win the NBA title. And the Cavs are currently on a 66-win pace, nudging very close to a 67-win pace. Another week of wins could have them on a solid 67-win pace.

The list of 65-win teams in NBA history reads like a who's-who of basketball: Michael Jordan's Bulls won a league record 72 in 1995-96 and followed that up with 69-win effort in 1996-97. Jordan's Bulls also won 67 in 1991-92.

Larry Bird's Celtics won 67 in 1985-86, nearly matched by last season's Celtics of Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce, who won 66. The Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant-led Lakers of 1999-2000 won 67. Magic Johnson's Lakers won 65 in 1986-87. Wilt Chamberlain's 76ers won 68 in 1966-67. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's Bucks won 66 in 1970-71. The Lakers of Chamberlain, Elgin Baylor and Jerry West won 69 in 1971-72 and were largely regarded as the greatest single-season team of all time until the '95-'96 Bulls.

All of those teams won the NBA title. Finding a 65-win team that didn't win the NBA title is a needle-meets-haystack proposition. The 1972-73 Celtics won 68, but lost to the eventual NBA champion Knicks in the conference finals. The Dallas Mavericks won 67 in 2006-07 and managed to get bumped out of the playoffs in the first round by the Warriors, who were coached by Don Nelson, the man who installed the Mavericks' offense in the late '90s. It's hard to fight your shadow and win.

The 65-win mark isn't an arbitrary number pulled from a fishbowl. There are a number of 64-win teams that didn't win the NBA title, including the 1995-96 Sonics and the 1996-97 Jazz, both of whom fell victim to Jordan's Bulls in the Finals. The 2005-06 Pistons won a franchise-record 64 games, but lost in the conference finals. The Spurs won a franchise-record 63 in 2005-06, but lost a hotly-contested seven-game series to the Mavericks in the conference semifinals.

There are certainly many years in which teams with fewer than 65 wins walk off into the sunset with world championship hardware. But reaching the 65-win plateau seems to mark a dramatic increase in a team's chances of winning the title.

Of course, many of the championship teams listed above were the undisputed alpha dogs of the NBA in their title-winning years. It's much easier to win the whole ball of wax when you have the rest of the league on a string. This year, 65 wins won't even get the Cavs undisputed alpha dog status. Both the Cavs and Lakers stand strong chances of winning 65. It would make for an epic NBA Finals showdown, but it would also mean that some team is getting added to the short list of 65-game winners that didn't win the NBA title.

But if the Cavs can simply outpace the Lakers and finish with a better record, the Lakers' final win total might not matter. Reaching the 65-win plateau is a sign of a team's ability to dominate for long stretches, but the correlation between 65-win seasons and championships is rooted in something more cause-and-effect: Homecourt advantage.

If you win 65, you probably have clinched the best record in the league in most years. If you have the best record in the league, that means homecourt advantage throughout the playoffs. Having Games 5 and 7 of conference playoff series and Games 6 and 7 of the NBA Finals on your home turf can do wonders for swinging a series in your favor.

Homecourt advantage is more valuable to the Cavs than any other team. Not so much because the Cavs are less capable of winning road playoff games than other contenders, but because Quicken Loans Arena has been the Cavs' ace in the hole this season. They're 32-1 at The Q entering play Wendesday.

There is a good chance the Cavs will go as far as homecourt advantage takes them. In a season during which the first overall seed has been hotly contested among four potential 60-win teams, that is the significance of reaching the 65-win mark for the Cavs.

To the victor goes the spoils. The spoils, in this case, is the right to host Game 7.

To rebuild or not?

There was a point in time, from the 2007 draft to roughly mid-2008, when former Browns GM Phil Savage was lauded around town as the anti-Mark Shapiro/anti-Danny Ferry.

While the general managers of the Indians and Cavaliers played it close to the vest with trades and free agent signings, laboring under the supposed pretense that no move was better than an overly risky move, Savage was a riverboat gambler. He had cap space, he had the deep pockets of Randy Lerner, and he wasn't afraid to use them.

Savage became known around Cleveland as the GM who would bring a free agent to town and not let him leave Berea without a contract. That's how he landed Eric Steinbach and Joe Jurevicius. Both of those marquee signings helped the Browns seemingly turn their fortunes around with a 10-6 season in '07.

That following winter and spring, Savage used the same aggressive approach to try and improve the defense, trading away the team's '08 second round pick to the Packers for defensive lineman Corey Williams, and dealing their '08 third-rounder plus Leigh Bodden to the Lions for Shaun Rogers. The latter trade occurred after a trade that would have sent Rogers to Cincinnati fell through at the last minute. It was a headline-grabbing example of Savage's opportunism.

If you looked hard enough, you could certainly find critics, those who cautioned us that pawning off draft picks like Monopoly money is generally bad business in sports (see Stepien, Ted). But most of us were as lightheaded as bobby-soxers at a post-World War II Frank Sinatra concert. A Cleveland GM? Aggressively trying to improve his team? Yes, please.

Fast forward to March 2009. The Browns are coming off a 4-12 season. The names of Savage and Romeo Crennel have been relegated to the team's history books. George Kokinis and Eric Mangini have replaced them, and distance has offered some perspective on Savage, Crennel and the jobs that Mangini and Kokinis have before them as they drop the engine and become the latest tandem of mechanics to attempt repairs to the Browns roster.

The overarching question facing Mangini and Kokinis: Is the Browns roster in need of a rebuild?

According to media reports, Mangini felt he could win with much of the current roster intact. It was allegedly one of his main selling points to Lerner when he interviewed for the head coaching job. Scott Pioli's reported desire to scrap the Browns' roster and begin anew might be the biggest reason why he is now the main football operations man in Kansas City and not Cleveland.

But anyone can say anything to land a job, and Mangini, for all his built-in-Belichick's-image secrecy, probably did a great job of selling Lerner on the idea that the Browns have a talent to win, but they need the right coach and front office to facilitate winning. Likely followed by a smile and thumbs-up reminiscent of "Bob" from the ubiquitous Enzyte TV commercials.

When Mangini arrived on the job and finally brought aboard his right-hand man in Kokinis, their opinions on what to do with the Browns roster might have started to change. If it hasn't, circumstances might force their collective hand. The Browns roster is not as healthy as we might want to believe.

In retrospect, many of Savage's most praised moves from the past two years now look like the work of a GM who was playing for the immediate future, a GM who was unsure of whether he was going to retain his job if he didn't start winning right away. It's great to expedite the rebuilding process when you can, but in 2007 and '08, Savage simply did not care about the fallout his moves might cause in 2009 and '10.

Savage's thinking was probably something like this: If he could put a winner on the field in '07 and '08, it would buy him more time to figure out what to do when age, injuries and the salary cap brought the piper to town looking for his pay. If he failed, he'd be fired, and the mess would be someone else's to clean up. The second scenario became reality in January.

Now it is, in fact, time to pay the piper for the short-term moves of Savage, and Mangini and Kokinis have some difficult decisions to mull over.

They've already started, trading away Kellen Winslow -- a player Savage inherited from Butch Davis. Winslow likely would have been dealt no matter who had been running the team. Winslow had simply worn out his welcome in Cleveland. Winslow wasn't a Savage move, but it marked the beginning of the deconstruction of the Savage roster -- or at least the problem areas therein.

Since then, notable cuts have included Joe Jurevicius, an extremely popular local boy who is now a 30-something possession receiver coming off seven knee operations, due to post-surgical staph infections. Kevin Shaffer, a major offensive line free agent signing three years ago, was also cut. Both were cut, in part, to avoid a combined roster bonus of $1.25 million. The payment of roster bonuses is a major drawback of trying to reorganize an NFL roster filled with expensive free agent signings. It inevitably leads to cuts if a team is looking to save money.

That's before we even broach the subject of Shaun Rogers, who last month asked for a trade or release because either A) his feelings were hurt because Mangini didn't greet him on several occasions, B) his feelings were hurt because Browns officials asked him to come to camp in shape and not pushing 400 pounds, or C) he saw the fat contract awarded to Albert Haynesworth by the Washington Redskins, and wants a piece of that action.

Now, Mangini and Kokinis have another curious case to deal with in Donte Stallworth, who reportedly struck and killed a pedestrian while driving in Miami on Saturday. Charges hadn't been filed against Stallworth as of Saturday night, but if blood-alcohol tests find that he was over the legal alcohol limit in Florida, it instantly becomes an imprisonable offense upon conviction.

Keep in mind that Stallworth inked a seven-year, $35 million contract with the Browns a year ago. About $10 million of that is guaranteed. There is a chance that Stallworth's deal could be voided if he is charged and convicted, and those circumstances violate his contract. But regardless of the outcome, it's another sideshow the Browns don't need, and more money they don't need to pay out for little or no production.

Losing Stallworth might be viewed as a positive by many fans, but it would also deprive the Browns of their supposed No. 2 receiver and create serious depth problems at the position when combined with the losses of Jurevicius and Winslow. Mangini and Kokinis might be forced to draft a receiver they weren't otherwise planning to draft.

That's on top of glaring needs at linebacker, in the secondary, on the right side of the offensive line, the lack of a true pass rusher, and the knowledge that Jamal Lewis is running on fumes, necessitating the acquisition of a feature running back within the next two offseasons.

Put it all together, and the new Browns regime is not in an enviable position. Perhaps they're doing all they can at the moment -- purging the sideshows, bringing in some solid-if-unspectacular help through Mangini's Jets connections, and preparing for the draft. The last item is the most important on the checklist.

In the NFL, team building is all about the draft, and successful drafting is the only way a team achieves what the Patriots and Steelers have achieved this decade. There is no way around it.

Savage tried to find a way around it. He left Mangini and Kokinis with a roster full of Band-Aids, short-term fixes designed to save the jobs of Savage and Crennel, but never designed to promote a long term winning culture. And in the end, that's exactly what Savage received for his efforts -- a quick-fix 10-6 season that saved his job for the immediate future, followed by a cold splash of reality as his team crumbled around him one year later.

That reality is what Eric Mangini and George Kokinis are dealing with presently.

Cavs: Lucky and good

If the Cavaliers win the NBA title this June, and newly-signed forward Joe Smith plays an important role in breaking Cleveland's 45-year title drought, we might have to revise our whole perception of Cleveland sports.

Those of us under the age of 40 have been raised to believe that random good luck simply does not happen to Cleveland sports teams. Sure, the ping-pong balls of the 2003 NBA draft lottery delivered LeBron James to us, but it took a 17-65 season to tie the Nuggets for the highest number of ping-pong balls in the NBA's lottery machine that year.

Former GM Jim Paxson put a lot of work into making the Cavs bad enough to have a shot at LeBron, and believe it or not, much of it was by design as he pawned off Lamond Murray, Wesley Person and Andre Miller in salary dumps. In short, landing LeBron was ultimately a game of chance, but the pre-lottery maneuvering was far from an uncalculated move on the part of the Cavs.

Fast-forward five and a half years, and LeBron has formed the backbone of an elite team. It was a bumpy road at times, as LeBron pulled the team to their first NBA Finals berth in 2007, only to have the team imploded and rebuilt midway through the following season, as GM Danny Ferry assessed his team and came to the accurate conclusion that, as constructed prior to the 2008 trade deadline, the team couldn't win an NBA title.

We know the story by now. Ferry jettisoned nearly half the roster in a transformational three-way trade with Chicago and Seattle. Among the players acquired was Smith, a veteran forward known to history as the player who never really lived up to the billing of the No. 1 pick of the 1995 NBA draft, but a player known in NBA locker rooms and front offices as a hard worker and excellent teammate.

While Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Ben Wallace nursed bad backs through last year's playoffs, it was Smith who stepped up against the Wizards and Celtics, becoming arguably the Cavs' most reliable big man. He helped give the Cavs a puncher's chance against the Celtics juggernaut, but the upset big came up about two minutes too short in Game 7, and the Cavs' season ended on a cloudy day in May.

From that point, Smith moved into the final year of his deal and went from valuable bench contributor to valuable expiring contract. When Ferry had the chance to add a frontline starting point guard in Mo Williams, he reluctantly parted with Smith as part of the three-way trade, sending him to the Oklahoma City Thunder. It was the only real drawback to what was otherwise a heist of a trade for the Cavs.

The absence of Smith hasn't prevented the Cavs from attaining the best record in the Eastern Conference and securing a playoff berth more than two weeks before the vernal equinox, but the consensus among the fans and media (and we'd assume the big thinkers in the Cavs front office) was that the Cavs lacked veteran big man depth. Rookies J.J. Hickson and Darnell Jackson have showed promise, but playing unpolished rookies big minutes in the playoffs is a fool's bet.

Having traded Smith after July 1 of last year, the Cavs couldn't reacquire Smith via trade during this season per NBA rules. But the idea of reacquiring Smith via a buyout was likely always in the back of Ferry's mind.

This is where the random luck comes in, because there were so many ways in which the reunion of Smith and the Cavs could have been thwarted. Yet the pieces, many of which weren't under the control of Ferry or the Cavs, still fell into place.

Here is some of what it took to bring Smith back to Cleveland:

Ferry stood pat at the trade deadline.

Obviously, this was under Ferry's control. Ferry could have made a trade prior to the NBA trade deadline, using Wally Szczerbiak's expiring contract to add a major piece. But in the end, Ferry decided he didn't want to alter the roster to that degree.

After watching Shaq storm through Florida like General Sherman marching to the sea this past week, running smack on Stan Van Gundy and Dwight Howard in Orlando and giving Dwyane Wade the full Kobe Bryant treatment in Miami, it almost makes you glad that Ferry passed on the chance to bring Shaq and his perpetual sideshows aboard. Almost.

Tyson Chandler's ankle didn't pass a physical.

On Feb. 17, the Hornets sent Chandler to the Thunder in exchange for Smith and Chris Wilcox. But the Thunder's bigwigs didn't like what they saw when their doctors examined Chandler's ankle, and the trade was rescinded on Feb. 18, sending Smith and Wilcox back to Oklahoma City.

A buyout wouldn't have happened with the Hornets, a playoff team that was looking for veteran frontcourt help. But thanks to Chandler's bum ankle and the Thunder's skittish reaction to it, Smith was returned to the bottom-feeding Thunder and the buyout speculation could resume.

Danny Ainge might have panicked.

Think NBA GMs are always cool, calculating life forms who never feel any pressure from outside sources? Celtics head of basketball operations Danny Ainge is here to dispel that myth right now.

After months and months of hearing media members across New England and the nation talk repeately about how the Celtics needed more bench depth the way a man stranded in the Sahara needs water, Ainge seemed to get a bit hasty in the days after the trade deadline.

Saddled with no real tradeable assets, Ainge needed to add pieces via free agency. If Ainge had waited until March 1, Smith could have been a very real possibility for the Celtics. The Celtics have the hardware to prove that they can give an aging veteran a legitimate shot at a ring. The Celtics also have Kevin Garnett, a close friend of Smith's dating to their days with the Timberwolves. Both of those facts could have trumped the Cavs' ability to offer a couple million more in salary.

But lucky for the Cavs, Ainge didn't wait on Smith. He quickly snatched up Mikki Moore and Stephon Marbury. Moore is a seven-footer and has a reputation as a pest, but his skill set is more limited than Smith's. Marbury hadn't played in an NBA game since last season, and even at his best, he usually needs a lot of playing time, touches and shots to make an impact.

It would appear that at this point, Smith has more ability than Moore or Marbury to add quality depth to a contender's bench. Ainge might very well have gone with the quickest fix instead of the best choice, and Ferry's team might now reap the benefits of Ainge's decision.

Ben Wallace broke his leg.

How is this a stroke of good luck? It's doubtful Smith, at 33 and with some gas left in the tank, would have joined a contender to play the role of window dressing. Like any veteran player, he wanted to be put to work.

The prospect of joining the Cavs to fight with J.J. Hickson for minutes behind Ilgauskas, Wallace and Anderson Varejao probably wouldn't have appealed to him. But with Wallace on the shelf for the next few weeks, Smith knew he'd have a chance to come to the Cavs and draw significant minutes right away.

If Wallace can return to the starting lineup before the end of the regular season with no ill effects from his injury, it might have been the best kind of bad break a team can hope for.

The Cavs have laid the groundwork with their play.

In years past, it was the Lakers, Celtics, Spurs and Pistons snatching up the veteran players looking for a shot at a ring. Six years ago, the Lakers grabbed Karl Malone and Gary Payton at cut-rate prices. The Celtics snagged James Posey, P.J. Brown and Sam Cassell for pennies on the dollar last year, and all played significant roles in returning Boston to the top of the NBA.

The Cavs just didn't have that kind of reputation. But now Smith's return might have changed some of that. The Cavs have played so well this year, a veteran player like Smith is willing to come here during the middle of the season, of his own accord, to try to win a title here.

Maybe playing here a year ago helped increase Smith's comfort level with returning, but the bottom line is he wouldn't have agreed to come back to Cleveland if he didn't think the Cavs offered him a real shot at a title.

You have to win in order to lure players who can help you win. And now, thanks to some random luck, some foresight from Ferry and elite-level play from the Cavs all season, they have another player who can help them win.

Say it's so, Joe

Joe Smith is averaging 6.6 points and 4.5 rebounds in just over 19 minutes a game for the Oklahoma City Thunder, a team that is in any conversation for the worst in the NBA.

But if he is bought out by the Thunder and ends up on the Cavaliers' doorstep in the next few days, he'll get the superstar treatment from both the organization and the fans.

The Cavs should be free from want. They had the best record, percentage-wise, in the Eastern Conference as of Saturday, leading the Central Division by 17 games, tops among the NBA's division leaders. They're counting down the games until they clinch the franchise's first division title in 33 years. At 45-12 entering March, they still possess an excellent chance of achieving the franchise's first-ever 60-win season.

But there is more than a little paranoia that comes with the Cavs' position. Anything less than an NBA title, and a season this good will still pale in comparison to whoever does win the title. Unfortunately, in the rarefied air of the NBA's elite, it's a pass/fail proposition. Either you win championships or you don't. And if you don't, history brands you a paper tiger, justly or unjustly.

Which is why the NBA's elite teams spend this time of year, in the weeks and days leading up to the March 1 postseason roster eligibility deadline, turning over every stone in an obsessive attempt to patch over every crack and blemish on their roster.

Well, not every team. The Lakers are so far out in front of the rest of the Western Conference, they don't have to harbor the sense of urgency that the East's top dogs have. They can wait on Andrew Bynum's return to health.

The Celtics, Cavs and Magic, however, are in a staredown for the first seed in the East. The season-ending injury to Jameer Nelson forced the Magic to deal for Rafer Alston at the deadline, but it still hasn't prevented Orlando from backsliding several games, allowing Boston and Cleveland to gain a little bit of separation.

As tough as the Magic have been this year, the Cavs and Celtics still seem the most threatened by each other. They're the conference's last two champions. The Celtics have a ring, and the Cavs have LeBron James. So when one makes a move, the other would logically feel the pressure to match that move.

All was quiet through the Feb. 19 trade deadline. Neither team made a move of consequence. The Celtics really didn't have the tradeable parts, and the Cavs didn't want to significantly alter the roster that had served them so well.

With no ability to make a trade of consequence, the Celtics had other plans in the week-plus after the deadline. Not that the plans were any big secret. Every member of the NBA-following public from coast to coast knew GM Danny Ainge was going to bargain-shop at the free-agent thrift store. There, he found Mikki Moore and Stephon Marbury to add to his bench. Moore had been released by the Kings. Marbury, in an epic saga of a spat with the Knicks, was eventually bought out and hurriedly signed in Boston for the chance at a ring.

In one week's time, the Celtics added two potentially significant pieces to their bench. That still wouldn't have been enough to faze the Cavs, if not for a nightmare of a game in Houston on Thursday night, when Ben Wallace broke his leg after a collision with Yao Ming.

Suddenly, the chess match between the Celtics and Cavs took a decided turn in favor of Boston. The Celtics added two veteran pieces, while the Cavs lost a starter (and locker room leader) for the foreseeable future.

Wallace is out for four-to-six weeks, according to media reports. If that is the case, he'll return before the end of the regular season. But the condition of his leg upon returning is not the stuff of guarantees. This is the 34-year-old Wallace of three points and seven rebounds per game, a far cry from the eight-point, 13-rebound per game Wallace of his Pistons prime. The only aspect of Wallace's game that really makes him valuable anymore is his ability to defend larger players on the floor, which requires the ability to move laterally and contest shots.

If Wallace returns with a stiff, weakened leg, he might be robbed of a great deal of that mobility, which could severely hinder his ability to play defense, or impact a game at all.

That means Anderson Varejao, who has historically been a far better player coming off the bench in smaller sample sizes, must step up his game -- particularly his defense -- and be prepared to fill Wallace's shoes for the remainder of the season -- even if Wallace returns to the floor on schedule. Which, in turn, means that J.J. Hickson will have to fill Varejao's bench role, possibly into the playoffs.

All of which brings us back to Joe Smith.

The playoffs are not a time to force feed relatively-raw rookies like Hickson into major minutes. Hickson can play basketball at a high level, but in the playoffs, when defense reigns, Hickson's inexperience will be exploited and abused by the veterans he'll be forced to guard.

There is no way that Hickson playing major minutes in the playoffs is a good thing. In future years, that will hopefully change, but for now the Cavs need a veteran big man, and the best option of all the realistic options appears to be Smith.

The problem is, he's under contract with the Thunder, so the Cavs can't influence any potential buyout negotiations under the NBA's anti-tampering rules. The best Danny Ferry can do is cross his fingers and hope that Smith sees an opportunity to help out his former teammates in Cleveland.

It's highly doubtful that Smith would leave the Thunder and sign with a contender just to be a spare part. The idea of fighting with Hickson for minutes behind Wallace, Varejao and Zydrunas Ilgauskas probably didn't appeal to him. But now that the Wallace injury has opened up minutes in the Cavs frontcourt for an able-bodied veteran, Smith might find the prospect of returning to Cleveland more attractive.

What we do know is that landing a player like Smith has become more of an necessity than a luxury for the Cavs at this point.

It wouldn't be the end of the world if the Cavs don't. The season won't screech to a halt, and the Cavs should still be able to advance deep into the playoffs. But when it comes to the prospect of knocking off the Celtics in a potential Eastern Conference Finals matchup, or the Lakers or Spurs in the NBA Finals, heading into battle with a creakier-than-ever Ben Wallace and an unready J.J. Hickson is far from ideal.

Smith, currently a part-time player on a bottom-feeding team, is a buyout away from becoming an important player in the Eastern Conference playoff race.

A season on the brink

Baseball's 162-game season is supposed to be a truth serum of sorts. It's extremely difficult to play over your head or stay mired in a slump while playing games nearly every day for six months.

Water tends to find its level, for players and teams. The good and bad, successes and failures, are tossed into a giant mixing bowl and whipped together until the resulting mixture offers a fairly realistic view of the player or team in question.

There are exceptions. Injuries can wreak havoc with a player's or team's potential, but then again, if the injury bug bites hard, the win-loss record will likely bear that out. Injuries are part of what makes a team and makes (or breaks) its season.

But if the marathon baseball season is among the best mirrors in sports, the Indians are still trying to figure out what their reflection is saying to them.

Over the past four years, the Indians have seen the many faces of what they can be. Some looks are flattering, some less so. At their best, in the 93-win season of 2005 and the 96-win ALCS season of 2007, they were greater than the sum of their parts. They were a team built on solid pitching in the rotation and bullpen and an offense that lacked power, but still produced runs.

At their worst, in 2006 and '08, they were lugging around a crumbled bullpen, hindered by injuries and, last year, traded away the ace of their pitching staff in anticipation of his departure via free agency. At their very worst, they have revealed their tendency to go knock-kneed when the pressure is highest, fumbling away a playoff berth in '05 and an American League pennant in '07.

It has been nearly a decade since Larry Dolan purchased the Tribe, nine years since Mark Shapiro took over as GM and entering the seventh year of Eric Wedge's managerial tenure, and the Indians still seem to find themselves in pursuit of the consistency that would brand them a truly elite stalwart of an organization. They've shown flashes of it, but the flame fizzles as quickly as it flickers.

The Indians are the ultimate balance-beam team. With middle of the pack financial resources and a middle of the pack payroll, they can exhibit an ability to swing with the big boys almost as easily as they can resemble an overmatched small market team. They can't outspend their mistakes or out-trade misfortune, so the line between an October to remember and a lost season is as thin as the chalk line between home and first base.

We keep waiting for the boom-bust pendulum to swing one way or the other and stay there. Promise in '04 and '05, disappointment in '06, seemingly arriving as a force in '07 only to regress to non-contention in '08.

The Indians' brass is quick to point out that injuries played a big role in the team's lackluster 81-81 season of a year ago. That's true. The unraveling of Jake Westbrook's elbow was a stroke of bad luck that every organization endures sooner or later. The Indians never asked for Fausto Carmona, Victor Martinez and Travis Hafner to all miss large chunks of the season.

But there was also the stubborn refusal on the part of Shapiro and Wedge to admit that closer Joe Borowski's arm was finished, despite the fact that he entered spring training last year throwing a fastball in the low 80s. There was the force-feeding of Martinez and his injured elbow into the lineup for weeks, until it became apparent that he wasn't going to be able to play through it.

Handling those situations differently might not have saved the Tribe's '08 campaign, but it illustrates the thin line between have and have-not. A couple of miscalculations here and there, and the season's slope goes from soapy to oil-slicked.

The point is, injuries played a part in last year's collapse, but to simply chalk the '08 season up to an infirmary case is not telling the whole story. Not when there is a precedent set of dramatic year-to-year momentum shifts with this team. Not when the offense goes into collective slumps that last weeks and weeks. Not when last year's rock-solid bullpen can become this year's bowl of tapioca pudding while still employing many of the same pitchers.

As much as Shapiro and Wedge value their grinders, this team doesn't seem to achieve grinder-type results all the time. Grinders are supposed to be rocks in a choppy sea, models of stability and taking the same approach, day in and day out. Each game is a single game out of 162. That has been the Wedge mantra and mindset since his first day on the job in 2003.

So why the violent shifts in fortune from year to year? Why the tendency toward meltdowns at the most inopportune times? These have been the defining negative traits of the Shapiro and Wedge years, and they seem to be the questions for which there are no easy answers. A lack of clubhouse leadership? A lack of a team swagger, like the Tribe teams of the '90s exhibited? Simply a loss of collective focus and inability to regain it in short order? All might factor into the equation.

On the positive side, Wedge has run a peaceful clubhouse with few exceptions and has instilled a no-excuses mindset with his players. The Indians are a quality team comprised of quality people. But the negative aspects can't be overlooked, because the negative aspects are what have, and might continue, to cost this team a shot at a World Series title.

Now, as the 2009 season dawns, fans are crossing their fingers and hoping that the '09 follows '05 and '07 into the history books as another odd-numbered year of success. The Indians undertook one of the most aggressive offseason improvement plans of any team outside The Bronx, signing fireballer Kerry Wood to be their closer, signing Carl Pavano to round out the starting rotation, trading for reliever Joe Smith and infielder Mark DeRosa. It looks like the Indians are set to show marked improvement over last year's performance.

But sooner or later, this game of hopscotch between odd and even-numbered years will end, and the Shapiro-Wedge era will cement itself as an era of sustained success or an era of failure punctuated by granules of fleeting success.

For their sakes, and for the sake of Indians fans who will enter their 61st year without a World Series title, the Indians' GM and manager had better do everything in their power to ensure that '09 is the start of a run of sustained success, and not just another odd-year spike in performance. Or worse yet, the season that proves that the relative successes of '05 and '07 were random blips on the radar.

By the time October rolls around and the Indians take a collective look in the mirror, they had better like what they see. If they see trophy hardware in the reflection, so much the better.

Countdown to the deadline

The NBA trade deadline must be in the near future. Rumors and conjecture are clogging the air like a bothersome, disorienting swarm of mosquitoes. Every media outlet seems to have a new player matched to a new team several times daily. And it's only going to pick up pace between now and zero-hour, which is 3 p.m. on Thursday.

Armed with the expiring contracts of Wally Szczerbiak and Eric Snow, and one of the best records in the league, the Cavaliers are at the center of much of the speculation. A major move by the Cavs could significantly swing the balance of power in the Eastern Conference.

With the dizzying spin of the rumor mill already making us lightheaded, let's make some sense of it all by taking an updated look at some of the rumors linked to the Cavs, which ones are dead and which ones just might happen between now and Thursday afternoon.


Amare Stoudemire

All Stoudemire deals appear to be dead and buried. The Stoudemire rumor machine became the biggest beast of this trading season, fueled by rampant national media speculation throughout the all-star break. But the Suns switched coaches on Monday, new coach Alvin Gentry expressed a desire to get back to the "Fun 'N Gun" offense that made the Suns' reputation this decade, and they really can't do that if they trade their best scorer.

Gentry holds the title of interim coach, but he still deserves a shot to win with a full deck for the remainder of the season. The Suns will still likely look at cutting salary at some point, but it might not be until this summer. The best a team like the Cavs could hope for is that Phoenix staggers to an unremarkable finish, Steve Kerr decides he needs to remake the philosophy of the entire team, and Stoudemire becomes available in the offseason. At that point, the Cavs would have the expiring contracts of Ben Wallace, and possibly Zydrunas Ilgauskas, to use as bargaining chips.

But as of now, Stoudemire is a Sun, and that's not going to change anytime soon.


Marcus Camby

It's a rare occasion when the Clippers are courted for anything. Most of the time, their roster is 75 percent garbage, and what talent they do have is either young and inexpensive or way overpaid.

But this year, the Clips hold a valuable piece in Marcus Camby. A rebounding, shot-blocking center with elite defensive skills who is signed for one more year, Camby's skill set, length of contract and solid character make him an attractive piece for any contender. Earlier this week, The Plain Dealer's Terry Pluto reported that Camby is at the top of Danny Ferry's wish list.

The Clippers, so used to being the bastard child of Los Angeles and the entire NBA, don't seem to know how to react to the sudden glut of attention. Mike Dunleavy, who became the unquestioned basketball guru of the organization following the ouster of longtime GM Elgin Baylor, has remained stubborn regarding Camby. According to published reports, he's turned away all Camby suitors. But Camby's name keeps popping up in trade rumors, and it would appear that hanging on to Camby offers the Clippers no real long term benefit, which would mean Dunleavy would be nuts to not at least listen to overtures that involve young talent.

Camby is 34 and the Clippers are once again rebuilding, meaning that there is an extremely high probability that Camby will bolt Clipperland once his contract expires in 2010.

Yet Dunleavy is either dead set on making a 34-year-old center a core member of his Clippers new world order, or he's waiting for a heist of a deal that isn't coming. Either way, it's typical confusing Clipper behavior. Don't hold your breath on a Camby trade involving the Cavs or any other team. But once you exhale, don't be surprised if Camby moves for an expiring contract and a pair of used sneakers, either.


Antawn Jamison

Jamison is the hot read now that the Stoudemire rumors have been deep-sixed. Both Brian Windhorst of The Plain Dealer and Chad Ford of ESPN have speculated about Jamison's appeal to the Cavs.

From purely a basketball standpoint, Jamison would be a good fit for the Cavs. He's a 6'-9" forward who can play inside and outside. He shoots with range, is an effective rebounder and has a sound all-around game. His 21.9 points per game and 9 rebounds per game this season are up from his career averages of 19.8 PPG and 8 RPG.

The downside is his age (32), his salary ($9.9 million this year, and rising after that) and the length of his contract (three more years). If the Cavs land Jamison, that's probably going to lock them into their current roster core through next season, and possibly beyond. In other words, no Stoudemire this summer. They'll sink or swim with LeBron James, Mo Williams, Jamison and Ilgauskas.


Caron Butler

If the Wizards are selling, Ferry might as well see what he can get. In the above linked story, Windhorst noted that Ferry has recently made pitches for both Jamison and Butler.

Butler's money situation is similar to Jamison's. He's making about $9 million this year and has three more years after that. The big difference is that Butler is 28, a wing player and solid perimeter defender.

Of course, if the Cavs landed Butler, his minutes would have to come from somewhere. Delonte West and Daniel Gibson would likely be the ones to sacrifice. Particularly in the case of West, chopping down his playing time upon return from injury probably isn't a good idea. The Cavs need more Delonte, not less.

In the end, Butler on the Cavs might pose the same problem as Vince Carter on the Cavs: Too many chefs in the kitchen. Butler is a 20 points per game scorer, but he's not going to get touches at the expense of LeBron or Mo. That means everyone else must sacrifice, and that might not go over too well in the locker room.


Mike Miller

I've never really understood Danny Ferry's alleged fascination with Miller, but his name keeps creeping up in connection with Cavs trade rumors.

The Cavs basically have a Mike Miller on their roster in Szczerbiak. Miller is a bit taller and more athletic, but I don't think he brings anything the Cavs don't already have. Miller is 28, so he's still in his prime years. But he's signed for $9 million this year, and has another year remaining on his contract. For that investment, the Timberwolves are getting 9.1 points, 3.7 assists and 34 percent shooting from beyond the arc in 31 minutes per game. Ferry should be able to find a player out there who can put up those numbers for less money.

If we're talking about using Eric Snow's expiring contract to get a useful player who can provide some bench depth and give us less Sasha Pavlovic come playoff time, I guess I can support the move. But if landing Stoudemire or Camby would qualify as a home run, landing Miller is more like a bleeder single under an infielder's glove.


Chris Bosh

I don't really have a lot to say about a Bosh deal because it's not going to happen. Not now, not next summer, and probably not ever.

I feel compelled to at least mention Bosh because the idea of a Bosh trade or free agent signing is something that a number of Cavs fans are holding near and dear. But Bosh is the single most valuable member of the Raptors roster. They will fight tooth and nail to keep him, and the only instance in which they'd trade him is if he held a free agency gun to management's head. Rumors to that effect were swirling several weeks ago, but shortly thereafter denied by both Bosh and Raptors management.

Even if Bosh were to arrive on the Cavs' doorstep via free agency in 2010, it would be extremely difficult to sign him, re-sign LeBron and put a competitive supporting cast around them at the same time. The 2010 offseason figures to be a very busy one for the Cavs, with a number of players slated to hit free agency beyond LeBron. It makes for a good deal of cap room, but also a good deal of uncertainty.

The 2010-11 Cavs could look drastically different from the current team, even if LeBron is still in house. There are only so many places that money can be spent, and if the Cavs put all their eggs in the LeBron and Bosh baskets, they could end up regretting it down the road.

Job 1 for the summer of '10 is re-signing LeBron, if he hasn't inked an extension beforehand. Job 2 and beyond is, at this point, undefined.

Some fans appear to take it for granted that Dan Gilbert will always spend gobs of cash on the Cavs roster. He's doing that right now because he sees this team is good enough to win a title. But the time will come when the return won't support the investment -- certainly not to the point of paying tens of millions in luxury tax penalties every year -- and Gilbert will rein in the spending. The Cavs roster will get younger and cheaper at some point, and that will probably start in 2010. Just so you've been warned.

Cry us a river

Good teams have huge collective egos. It comes with the territory of success.

Millionaire athletes who routinely beat other millionaire athletes are bound to develop a high opinion of themselves, as a unit if not individually.

There is nothing wrong with believing you are good. Confidence is a key ingredient in sustained success, in any endeavor. That's why so many motivational-speaker types wax poetic about visualizing success in order to make it happen.

The Cavaliers are Cleveland's Exhibit A on the effects of success. All season long, the Cavs have been drubbing opponents on a regular basis, winning at around an .800 clip for most of the campaign. They made it well into February without a home loss, and their road record isn't too shabby, either. In short, the Cavs expect to win every game, and have developed a sharp distaste for losing.

If the Cavs are following the Michael Jordan method to championship hardware, that's great. Jordan detested losing and did everything in his power to avoid it. Jordan also knew that he was the best player every time he stepped onto the court. By the time the Bulls achieved their second three-peat from 1996-98, that attitude had completely rubbed off on his team. The Bulls won 72 games in the 1995-96 season and didn't release their iron grip on the NBA for three years.

With that kind of success comes a sense of entitlement. Those Bulls, like the Celtics of the '80s and the Spurs of this decade, did their share of whining to the referees. They believed it was their birthright to get the benefit of the doubt on every call. Great teams tend to openly, sometimes bitterly, contest every call and non-call that go against them. Teams like the Celtics, Bulls and Spurs believe that more leeway and respect should be shown to them than the average team. When they don't get it, those in authority hear about it.

The Cavs have very much developed that attitude, particularly as the 2009 portion of the schedule has unfolded. With their status as an elite team cemented, the intermittent chirping at the refs has turned into a pandemic of whining, both on and off the floor.

But there is a big difference between this year's Cavs and the teams mentioned above: The Cavs haven't won a title yet. And that's the reason why the Cavs' status as the league's next great crybaby team is so troubling.

If the problem was confined to LeBron shuffling up to the refs with his arms out and a pained expression on his face after every foul or non-foul that he finds unsatisfactory, that would be one thing. You roll your eyes. It would be nice if LeBron would whine a tad less, but due to his unprecedented combination of speed and size, he does get hacked a lot with no toot from the refs' whistles. Many times, he has a legitimate beef.

If the effect on the rest of the team was limited to Anderson Varejao mimicking LeBron's arms-out and just-sucked-a-lemon facial expression after getting busted for lifting his pivot foot, you'd roll your eyes again. Andy is good at playacting. He has a career as a mime waiting for him after his basketball days are over.

But that isn't all that is going on with this team.

The first sign that something is really wrong with this team's attitude occurred two weeks ago when Mo Williams failed to make the cut for the Eastern Conference all-star team. Mo is having a good year and is a key component on a top-shelf team. He had a case built for a trip to Phoenix. Not an airtight case, but it wouldn't have been an embarrassment if the coaches had voted him in.

But they didn't. Orlando's Jameer Nelson made the cut instead. And the Cavs started crying bloody murder.

Ben Wallace made up a new word to characterize the diss, calling it a "shamockery" -- an affront that carries qualities of both a sham and a mockery. LeBron spouted off to the media. Mike Brown, who will be coaching the Eastern Conference all stars, had some choice words.

The bees' nest settled down after a few days, and the Cavs stuffed their hands into their pockets, sulked back to work and resumed the task of winning games. But then, fate intervened and offered the Cavs a whole new soapbox.

Jameer Nelson went down with a shoulder injury. The NBA front office would need to name a replacement. The Cavs crossed their fingers, rubbed their rabbit's foot, and waited for the slam-dunk announcement that the East all-star roster would be rounded out by ... Ray Allen.

Strike two, Mo. You're out.

The demonstrative complaining morphed into an something bigger, a episode of finger-pointing that reached all the way to the top of the organization. Squarely in the crosshairs? NBA commissioner David Stern, a man not afraid to flex his authoritarian muscles when needed. As a general rule, Stern doesn't like to be questioned about his decisions. Cavs management fired away, however.

Danny Ferry politely questioned Stern's knowledge and appreciation of the Cavs. But he questioned it nonetheless:

"I know Commissioner Stern has followed our team's success but maybe doesn't appreciate how important Mo has been to our team."

Comments like that probably make the hairs on the back of Stern's neck stand up. What Dan Gilbert said probably makes Stern reach for his stress squeezy-ball. And you wouldn't like him when he's using his squeezy-ball.

"Ben Wallace was right when he called Mo originally being passed over for the All-Star game a 'shamockery,' " Gilbert told The Plain Dealer via e-mail. "But not naming him as the natural and obvious replacement for the unfortunately injured Jameer Nelson is stupidiculous, idillogical and preposterageous."

Maybe Gilbert meant it half in jest. Maybe he was just trying to inject some levity into the situation. But when you're dealing with the all-powerful long-standing commissioner of the league in which your team plays, it might be best to assume that he was born without a sense of humor, likes to be called "sir," and doesn't want to hear your voice unless he addresses you.

Instead, Gilbert didn't just question Stern. He didn't just accuse Stern's people of making the wrong choice. He did so in a condescending tone, using Wallace's made-up word as the basis for a juvenile string of commissioner-flaming nonsense.

Gilbert might have thought he was being funny. To us as Cleveland fans, it was funny. To Stern, it was a franchise owner saying "Since you're so ignorant as to what is going on in Cleveland, I guess I have to use Mike Tyson-speak to communicate with you. I hope you find my style impetuous."

I think Gilbert has been an amazing owner with regard to the product he's put on the basketball floor, and the improvements he's made to the Cavs organization as a whole. But I also see a streak of Mark Cuban in him that is a bit unsettling.

If you've seen the classic baseball movie "Bull Durham," you're probably familiar with the scene in which Crash Davis tells Annie Savoy that a player on a streak has to respect the streak and shouldn't do anything to disrupt said streak. In other words, "Don't (blankety-blank) with a winning streak."

Thumbing your nose at David Stern with made-up words is most definitely blankety-blanking with a winning streak. Unlike in Bull Durham, it's about a lot more than perpetuating superstitions.

If you're a conspiracy theorist, you could readily draw a line between the reactions of Gilbert and Ferry to Mo's second all-star snub, and the league's decision to strip LeBron of his historic triple-double last week at Madison Square Garden by taking away his ninth rebound.

Did the rebound rightfully belong to Wallace? Probably. But the NBA has let greater injustices slide past without lifting a finger. The decision to strip LeBron of his triple-double seems punitive in nature when taken in the context of when it happened (two days after the game) and the fact that it happened right after the remarks of Gilbert and Ferry went public.

If there was any chance the league would let the triple double slide into history as a subject of debate, it was lost after the Cavs' bigwigs took their discontent over Mo's snub to the media.

Since then, the Cavs have developed an us-against-them mindset. That's great, but only if it leads to steely resolve and wins. If it leads to paranoia and a meltdown, the Cavs are going to be watching the NBA Finals on TV come June.

Before the Cavs were dealt their first home loss of the season on Sunday, LeBron got in another parting shot at the Eastern Conference coaches and the league over Mo's snub, saying "That's how they always treat us .... they wouldn't take me as an all-star if they had their way."

That's just crazy talk. Unfortunately, in Cavs land, emotions seem to be winning out over zipping it and getting to work at the moment. In the process, they're getting on the bad side of David Stern, the man who controls the refs, signs off on trades, and generally plays the role of puppet master.

Not to insinuate that Stern would influence the outcome of a playoff series, but it's never good to try and win a championship when your team's owner and superstar player have built an icy, ego-driven wall between themselves and the commissioner's office. It's a chance no team -- certainly not a team in a city that has gone 45 years without a major pro sports title -- should be willing to take.

Think I'm off base? Think back to the 2006 Finals, and ask yourself if the Dallas Mavericks will ever win an NBA title so long as Mark Cuban owns them.

Firing the Wally bullet

As far as NBA players go, Wally Szczerbiak is kind of plain.

Sure, he has a funky last name with multiple Z's, and you don't find too many modern-era NBA players who go by "Wally." But beyond that, he's a serviceable role player on the Cavaliers bench, a guy who can knock down a few jumpers, guard a couple of different positions and high-five everyone in sight.

Szczerbiak doesn't even sport visible tattoos. This in a league where arm, neck, chest and back ink is as much of a birthright as penthouse suites and limousine service.

But as the calendar marches into February, Wally Szczerbiak is the man on every Cavs fan's mind. If you don't know the reason why, feel free to rejoin the living world anytime now.

After months and months of hypothesizing, scrutinizing and rumormongering, the NBA's trading deadline is now less than three weeks away -- 3 p.m. Eastern Time on Feb. 19. And Szczerbiak's $13.775 million expiring contract might be the most important bargaining chip in the league.

Of the league's top four teams -- the Cavs, Lakers, Celtics and Magic -- Cleveland has the most ready-made solution for adding a major piece before the deadline.

NBA rules state that a team over the salary cap can use an exception in a two-team trade to acquire contracts equalling up to 125 percent plus $100,000 of the outgoing contract or contracts. That means Szczerbiak's contract could allow the Cavs to acquire a player or players totalling up to about $17.3 million this NBA fiscal year, should owner Dan Gilbert be willing to take on that much extra salary.

Of course, it's not quite that simple. In order to perform a significant roster upgrade, Danny Ferry has to find a team willing to take on Szczerbiak's contract in exchange for what would likely be one of their core players. That means finding a front office that is eyeing a rebuild, or a team that is thoroughly disenchanted with a high-priced player in need of a change of scenery. Example A would be the Larry Hughes for Ben Wallace swap the Cavs and Bulls conducted a year ago.

Other players Ferry might potentially consider -- such as Washington's Antawn Jamison and the Clippers' Marcus Camby -- make less than Szczerbiak, which would require further maneuvering by Ferry, possibly to the point of getting a third team involved.

That's all assuming Ferry will even deal Szczerbiak. With the recent rash of injuries to Cleveland's backcourt, and the recent uptick in Szczerbiak's performance, Ferry might come to the conclusion that the best course of action is to sit tight and wait for Delonte West and Tarence Kinsey to return from injury.

But this is a column about trades, so below are some of the Cavs' possible trade targets, their upsides and downsides, and a percentage chance of acquiring the player. Statistics are as of Tuesday evening.


Antawn Jamison, Washington Wizards

2008-09: 21.3 PPG, 9.2 RPG

Upside: Jamison is a points and rebounds machine who would fit very well as a member of the Cavs bench corps. A career small forward who has transitioned to the power forward spot in Washington, Jamison is a durable 32-year-old who now has veteran savvy to go along with his wide array of skills.

Downside: He is signed for three more years, and this year is slated to make $9.9 million. He grabs rebounds, but won't provide a lot in the way of low-post scoring. His bread and butter is his mid-range shooting touch -- which is valuable, but if you're looking for a rugged bumper-grinder to wear down the likes of Kevin Garnett and Dwight Howard, Jamison is not your guy.

Another potential problem is his $9.9 million salary. As mentioned above, that could make fitting Jamison into a trade for Szczerbiak somewhat difficult. A third team might have to get involved. That's assuming the Wizards would even trade their best player to the Cavs, their long-time tormentors.

Jamison to the Cavs: 10 percent

Marcus Camby, Los Angeles Clippers

2008-09: 11.7 PPG, 13.1 RPG, 2.5 BPG

Upside: Camby will turn 35 in March, but he's still one of the premier defensive big men in the game. He can score to the tune of double figures per game, but it's his defense, rebounding and shot blocking that set his game apart.

If the Cavs had Camby patrolling the paint, it would allow Ben Wallace, Anderson Varejao and even Zydrunas Ilgauskas to roam away from the basket and pressure players on the wings. That could come in handy if the Cavs draw the Magic in the playoffs. The Cavs will need tall defenders who can bother Hedo Turkoglu and Rashard Lewis, Orlando's 6'-10" perimeter bombers.

Downside: Camby has been an injury case for much of his career. Though he has remained healthy in recent years, a 35 year old with an injury history always gives reason to pause. Camby recently returned to the Clippers' lineup after missing several games with an ankle injury.

Camby, with a $10 million salary this year, is another player who would pose numbers problems in a trade involving Szczerbiak.

Having said all of that, Camby could be a prime target for Ferry.

Camby to the Cavs: 20 percent

Vince Carter, New Jersey Nets

2008-09: 21.1 PPG, 5.1 RPG, 4.6 APG

Upside: Carter is a scoring machine. He's 32, but can still drive and shoot at an elite level. In the Cavs lineup, it would be virtually impossible for opposing teams to stop Carter, LeBron and Williams simultaneously.

Carter isn't a terribly physical player, but he has the size to grab rebounds, as his career 5.5 rebounds per game average would indicate. He has the black mark on his resume of having admittedly sandbagged as a member of the Raptors, but he has historically been a solid team player. This year, he willingly took a supporting cast role as the Nets began to construct their team around Devin Harris.

Downside: Acquiring Carter could easily turn into a case of too many chefs in the kitchen for the Cavs. Averaging nearly 17 shots per game this year, and just over 19 per game for his career, Carter would fight for touches on a Cavs team that already has two dominant scorers and a sharpshooting big man. For Carter to get his shots, every other Cav besides LeBron would have to sacrifice, which generally isn't a recipe for maintaining good team chemistry.

Szczerbiak for Carter straight up works financially, and the two teams reportedly discussed that very trade last summer. But be careful what you wish for.

Carter to the Cavs: 15 percent

Brad Miller, Sacramento Kings

2008-09: 11.9 PPG, 8 RPG

Upside: Nearly two full months without an effective Zydrunas Ilgauskas showed us exactly how much the Cavs miss him when he's not out there. No other player on the roster matches Z's skill set or size. Miller, a seven-footer who excells at passing and shooting, would replicate Z's skill set closely enough to act as an insurance policy against injuries, and with a roster at full strength, would allow Mike Brown to have a shooting big man on the floor at all times.

Downside: Miller doesn't bring a ton in the way of defense, and he has virtually no low-post game. At age 32, he's starting to become increasingly injury-prone, which could lead to a nosedive in his production. In the end, there are probably better places to spend Szczerbiak's contract.

Miller to the Cavs: 5 percent

Amare Stoudemire, Phoenix Suns

2008-09: 21.2 PPG, 8.1 RPG

Upside: Stoudemire is a flat-out lethal scorer with an array of moves to free himself for shots. As a big man, he doesn't really have a traditional low-post game, but when you can fill the bucket the way Stoudemire does, who cares? If an opposing defense has to decide whether to guard LeBron or Stoudemire, someone is getting dunked on, early and often.

Downside: If Ferry and Brown are the staunch disciples of Gregg Popovich defensive basketball that we think they are, Stoudemire could be a poor match for the Cavs. He has never developed himself as a defender, and when he tries to dig in his heels, he usually ends up committing fouls. Some of that might be due to spending a good portion of his young career playing for offensive guru Mike D'Antoni. Brown could reform Stoudemire into a good defender, but it might take some time.

A more pressing issue is the fact that Stoudemire wants to be the focus of the offense in Phoenix. That sentiment probably won't disappear if he gets traded, even to LeBron's team. As with Vince Carter, Stoudemire's touches are going to have to come at the expense of other players, which could create tension. Stoudemire is a top-1o player in the NBA, but he really can't influence a game without the ball in his hands.

But this might all be a moot point. There have been media rumblings that the Suns might be on the verge of blowing up their roster and rebuilding, but it seems far-fetched to think they'd part with Stoudemire on such short notice, unless GM Steve Kerr was bowled over by a trade proposal.

Stoudemire to the Cavs: 2 percent

Elton Brand, Philadelphia 76ers

2008-09: 14.3 PPG, 9 RPG

Upside: You want low-post scoring? Brand can give you low-post scoring. Possessing solid footwork and a deft shooting touch that includes a mid-range jumper, Brand is a member of a dying breed: a basketball player who makes his living by boxing out and scoring off the block. Basketball, particularly NBA basketball, has become a wing player's game, so a big man with Brand's skill set can pose all kinds of matchup problems for defenses.

Brand hasn't really fit in with the Sixers, largely because they have a team full of floor-runners who want to push the ball. Brand excels at half-court basketball, and the Sixers don't play at the slow, methodical place needed to truly take advantage of Brand's skill set. What it means for the Cavs is that Brand could be available for the right price.

Downside: He's coming off a severe ankle injury that ruined his final season with the Clippers, and might affect his lateral mobility for the rest of his career, something to consider when saddling yourself with the bulk of a five year, $80 million contract that Brand signed with the Sixers last summer. That's a lot of money and years to pay for a guy who looks to be on the back nine of his career at age 29.

Of course, if all he needs is a change of scenery, whoever is able to pry him loose from the Sixer might look like a genius.

Brand to the Cavs: 5 percent

Joe Smith, Oklahoma City Thunder

2008-09: 6.7 PPG, 4.4 RPG

Upside: Smith is already familiar with the Cavs system, having played three months here last season. If the Cavs are looking for some bench depth, as opposed to a making a major splash, Smith would fit well. He can't absorb major minutes, but he makes the most of the minutes he gets.

Downside: The Cavs can't trade for him, since they dealt him after last July 1. The Thunder would have to buy Smith's contract out and make him a free agent. It seems simple enough, but once Smith is on the market, any team can sign him. You had better believe the Celtics and Magic would make strong plays for Smith. Now that Andrew Bynum is out for up to three months, the Lakers might get in on the action as well.

Having said all of that, this might be the most realistic and appealing option for Ferry, who still has all of his midlevel exception money to play with.

Smith to the Cavs: 25 percent

Go Steelers?

What defines a Browns fan in this day and age?

No secret, there isn't a whole heck of a lot on which to hang your hat.

You can re-live the glory days of the past, whether your frame of reference is Paul Brown as a football innovator, Jim Brown as an unstoppable rushing force, Brian Sipe and the Kardiac Kids or Bernie Kosar and those oh-so-close days of the late 1980s.

You can continue to examine the poorly-healed wound left by Art Modell's departure, seething with every morsel of success the Baltimore Ravens attain.

You can find solace in knowing the every other Browns fan has trudged through the past decade with you, following the sorry fortunes of this facsimile second franchise, bearers of an unrevived legacy.

You can do some of that. You can do all of that. But you still won't have reached the one true-essence common denominator that defines a 21st Century Browns fan. To do that, you have to hate the Steelers.

How can you not? Even if you didn't want to hate the Steelers, you don't really have much of a choice. Steelers fans, true-blue, bandwagon or otherwise, populate northeast Ohio in droves. The scourge from the southeast is without question a powerful football force in Browns country.

The Steelers are without a doubt the second-most-popular pro football team in the Cleveland area. And because they win all the time, their fans aren't bashful about flaunting their black and gold on shirts, jackets, hats, bumper stickers, flags, yard signs -- you name it.

Now, before the Sun has faded the "Pittsburgh Steelers Super Bowl XL Champions" bumper stickers applied to so many vehicles throughout the region several years ago, the Steelers will likely give their fans the chance to apply a "Super Bowl XLIII Champions" sticker right over the top. It's all about staying current, after all.

Browns fans? They might discreetly place a small orange helmet on the back window of their cars. They might have a t-shirt they wear once in a while, maybe a Tim Couch jersey bought during the ancient history of the Carmen Policy years. Maybe you break out the brown and orange on Autumn Sundays, but you probably don't wear it around town 365 days a year like Pittsburgh fans.

Steelers fans are proud. Browns fans want to be proud, but more and more, treat their football loyalty like something of a dirty little secret -- particularly if family gatherings involve Steeler fans. It's kind of like admitting that you sing along to "Wake Me Up Before You Go-Go" by "Wham!" in the shower. The embarrassment potential is unbearable.

If you're a Browns fan, then you are the fan of a perpetual loser of a team sharing space with the fans of a five-time, likely soon to be six-time, Super Bowl championship team that lives less than two hours away and has the fans in your neighborhood to prove it. Resentment is inevitable. Outright hatred is probable.

But should it be anymore? Should you view Steeler-hate as your civic duty as a Browns fan?

Over the past 40 years, the Steelers have been far more successful than the Browns. Since the new Browns franchise began play, the discrepancy has become even more pronounced. Head-to-head, the Browns have beaten the Steelers just three times since 1999, and are winless since 2003. Since then, the Browns have managed a fluke of a 10-6 season, three 4-win seasons and no playoff berths while Pittsburgh has multiple Super Bowl appearances.

It's almost as if the Steelers and Browns are playing in separate leagues. Their success is so incomprehensible to our frame of reference as Browns fans, it's almost ridiculous to get jealous. If the Steelers win their sixth Super Bowl, get angry at Bill Gates the next time he makes a couple billion, whenever that is.

If anything, you should welcome further success by the Steelers instead of resisting it. Resistance is futile, anyway, and it won't make the Browns any better.

Why should you do something as dastardly as not hate the Steelers with every fiber of your being? Because Randy Lerner and his minions du jour should see the damage they're doing to a once-great rivalry. The most powerful statement that can be handed to Browns management is a city slowly being taken over by the team next door, while the fans of the home team have their once-burning passion eroded into apathy, even something of a sense of respect for what the Steelers have accomplished over the past four decades.

It will be a dark day for Browns fans everywhere when we collectively pronounce the rivalry with the Steelers dead. But it's already on life support. The Steelers and their fans consider the Ravens their top rival in the division, and they're right. Those in the Browns organization don't even recognize the rivalry on their own, largely because every presidential election since 2000 has occurred with the Browns under new management.

The only group keeping the Browns-Steelers rivalry torch lit is Browns fans, and maybe we need to extinguish it as a symbolic marking of the divergent paths of the two franchises. It can always be re-lit at a later date, but the arrival of that date could be measured in geologic time.

Maybe those in charge of the Browns are dense and/or oblivious and/or incompetent enough to not realize what they're ruining. But as the Steelers ready themselves for a shot at one for the other thumb while the Browns continue to wallow in last place with quicksand for an organizational foundation, it's hard to not see the handwriting on the wall, even for Randy Lerner: The Steelers are now; the Browns are so 50 years ago.

Last week, the Browns lost another link to their past with the death of Dante Lavelli. But more links to the past are dying as well, as the losing seasons mount and the distance between the present and the glory days grows ever wider. Nothing seems capable of stopping the separation between the current Browns and everything that made this franchise meaningful in the 20th Century.

So let's call it what it is. Choke on the words, but spit them out: The Steelers are the good guys. They're a quality organization with good ownership and solid executives. They deserve success because they have earned it. The Browns are the bad guys. They're the team that ruins careers, is frequently marred by infighting, can't keep a leadership team in charge for more than four years and is killing what was once a great rivalry.

This coming Sunday, there is a good chance the chasm between the two teams will only widen.

Follow the leader

For much of the decade, the NBA's Western Conference was the alpha dog of professional basketball. If you wanted to find the NBA's best teams, you usually didn't have to look east of the Mississippi.

From 2000 to '07, the West won six of eight NBA titles, all by the Lakers or Spurs. The two times in that period that an East team did rise up and win an NBA title -- the Pistons in 2004 and the Heat in 2006 -- the basketball-watching public viewed it as a major upset.

But as the decade draws to a close, so is the West's dominance in the NBA's lead pack. The Lakers are there, the Spurs and Hornets are still really good, but the pinnacle of the NBA has a decidedly Eastern flavor this year.

The stage was set last year with the Celtics' NBA title. This season, the Cavaliers and Magic have formed the other two prongs of a three-way battle. All three teams are on pace for well over 60 wins. All three teams have occupied the top spot in the conference at some point this season.

It appears the trio of teams will engage in a neck-and-neck horse race for the conference's top seed, a race that will only grow more frenetic and confusing as the end of the season draws closer.

So what is the real scoop on these three contenders? Here is some food for thought on the Cavs, and how they match up against the East's other two elite squads.

Cleveland Cavaliers

What makes them dangerous to Boston and Orlando:

1. LeBron James. As if you didn't know. He's the best player in the conference, and no one else can change a game the way he can with his combination of size, speed, vision and smarts. A motivated LeBron is a threat to beat any team, anytime.

2. The Cavs are statistically the best defensive team in the league. They surrender the fewest points per game in the league and typically stifle opposing field goal percentages at a rate that is at or among the league's best defenses. Good defensive basketball generally trumps good offensive basketball in the playoffs.

3. They're 20-0 at home. If the Cavs get homecourt advantage throughout the playoffs, beating them will be one tall order for any team.

What makes them vulnerable:

1. A sometimes-stagnant offense. LeBron still has some bad habits in his system, among them a tendency to hold the ball too long, take bad shots and coast for stretches, and that can rub off on the rest of the team.

To his credit, LeBron has never coasted in a big game, but when he cradles the ball and constantly hoists 20-footers, he stalls the offense. Generally, it happens when LeBron tries to take over a game and play one-on-five. LBJ consciously knows he doesn't have to play the hero in every single game this year, but once in a while, his subconscious could use a refresher course.

2. Perimeter defense. Until Delonte West returns from a broken wrist, the Cavs will be without their best perimeter defender. Even with him, Boston and Orlando present matchup problems because Mike Brown's defensive game plans dictate that his players concentrate on taking away high percentage shots inside, then work their way out to defend the lower-percentage shots on the perimeter.

That is a good philosophy, except when the other team heats up from the perimeter. Boston's Ray Allen is among the best shooters in league history, though he's lost a step or five in recent years. Paul Pierce can put on prodigious shooting displays from downtown as well. But the real danger is in facing Orlando.

The Magic possess a couple of 6'-10" mad bombers in Hedo Turkoglu and Rashard Lewis. Jameer Nelson is no slouch from long distance, either. With a mostly-undersized backcourt, the Cavs (as currently constructed) would likely need to rely heavily on the shot-challenging capabilities of their taller wing players -- LeBron, Sasha Pavlovic and Wally Szczerbiak -- to prevent Orlando from conducting a three-point shooting clinic.

Odds are Orlando wouldn't be able to stay smoking hot from long distance for an entire playoff series. But they'll be able to do a lot of damage if their shooters get consistent open looks.

Myth about the Cavs: They don't have a lot of frontcourt depth.

Everywhere Mike Brown has turned this year, he's gotten production out of his big men. When Z went down with a broken foot, Anderson Varejao moved into the starting lineup and J.J. Hickson absorbed some minutes off the bench, with decent results. Darnell Jackson is a foul-committing machine, but can play effective minutes for short stretches. Even Lorenzen Wright got in on the act, starting a couple of games last week when Ben Wallace had the flu.

Orlando Magic

What makes them dangerous to Boston and Cleveland:

1. Mismatches. With 6'-10" Hedo Turkoglu and Rashard Lewis and 6'-9" Brian Cook capable of hitting shots from anywhere on the floor, your frontcourt defense is going to be taxed to the limit in facing the Magic. And that's before considering how you're going to stop Dwight Howard.

2. Stan Van Gundy. His striking resemblance to adult film star Ron Jeremy is a running joke, but beyond the "Hedgehog" references, Van Gundy is a damn good coach. Much like Mike Brown did in his first couple of years with the Cavs, Van Gundy has taken an offensive-minded team and gotten them to play fundamentally-sound defense. A Stan Van Gundy team will always be a well-prepared and well-coached team.

3. Dwight Howard. He averages 20 points, 14 rebounds and 3 blocks per game. He's a beast.

What makes them vulnerable:

1. A lack of size inside. Once you get past Howard, Orlando's inside presence consists of Tony Battie and Adonal Foyle, with a little help from Lewis. The Magic might be able to out-shoot a lot of their shortcomings, but they are primed to get bruised and battered inside by Boston or Cleveland (or Atlanta or Detroit) in a playoff series. They are, in a word, finesse.

2. An overreliance on the three-ball. The Magic jack up an average of 26 three-pointers per game, making an average of 10.5, for a 40.3 conversion percentage. That's pretty good. But it's a high risk/high reward proposition. Much like a gunslinger quarterback, the Magic live and die by the deep ball. Building so much of your offensive attack around low-percentage shots could come back to bite them if the shots stop falling.

Myth about the Magic: No one is paying attention to them.

Cavs fans can dispense with all the "Magic are going to sneak up and get us" talk and Magic fans can pull the plug on the "No one respects us" talk. The Magic are not going bump in the night anymore. They're the worst-kept secret in sports. They've arrived, the national media is stroking them, they're soaking up their share of the spotlight. If they ambush any team in the playoffs, that team gets what they deserve.

Boston Celtics

What makes them dangerous to Cleveland and Orlando:

1. They're the champs. They've been to the summit, they know what it takes to get there, they've already proven they can win a championship together. Come playoff time, the burden is still on the Cavs and Magic to knock them off.

2. Stopping the Big Three is asking a lot. And I'm not talking about Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Ray Allen. Allen can score, but come playoff time against top-flight defenses, he will be reduced to a one-dimensional specialist. The Big Three I refer to is Garnett, Pierce and Rajon Rondo.

Rondo is arguably the most important cog in the Celtics' attack. He is the penetrator who draws in defenses and creates open looks for Pierce and Garnett. That's especially important as Garnett has aged into a second-decade player and has traded in his low-post game for a mid-range jumper.

3. TD Banknorth Garden is quite possibly the most hostile playoff environment in the league. Staples Center in Los Angeles and our very own Quicken Loans Arena will certainly get into the conversation, but the Celtics' house will be filled with thousands of loud, obnoxious, likely inebriated Red Sox fans looking to keep their voice boxes conditioned until October. Gloria James doesn't want to know what they're saying about her whenever LeBron is within earshot.

What makes them vulnerable:

1. A suspect bench. Sure, the Celtics are still winning at a tremendous clip this year, but there is no denying that this is a team minus James Posey and P.J. Brown from last year's title team. The bench is thin when compared to other contenders, especially the Lakers and Cavs. Boston could have less of an ability to absorb injuries and fatigue.

If the Celtics were actually considering signing noted locker room hand grenade Stephon Marbury if and when he became a free agent, that a sure sign that Danny Ainge and Celtics management have spent more than a little time fretting over their bench depth. They know it's something that could be exposed over the course of a seven-game series.

2. A lack of team speed. The Celtics do many things well, but running the floor isn't one of them. We saw it in the Cavs' January 9 win over the Celtics: If you can speed the game up, you can take them out of their comfort zone and possibly tire out their 30-somethings sooner.

Myth about the Celtics: They're the biggest band of crybabies in the NBA.

Kevin Garnett's constant act of taunting the opposition, screaming and beating his chest like an amphetamine-crazed Ray Lewis has certainly gotten old. Anyone west of the Massachusetts state line is sick of hearing Paul Pierce referred to as "The Truth." Unfortunately, however, you must be without sin to cast the first stone. And the fact is that strutting, preening, taunting -- and especially whining -- is an epidemic in the NBA.

LeBron is among the league's biggest ref-whiners, following in the grand tradition of Tim Duncan. Dirk Nowitzki does it. Kobe Bryant does it. Rasheed Wallace sure as heck does it. So while the Celtics might have taken a sense of entitlement and verbalized arrogance to something of an extreme, they're far from alone in the league.