Here's the AP report:
Cleveland Browns quarterback Derek Anderson wasn't a free agent for long.
Anderson has agreed to a multiyear contract to stay with the Browns, a person familiar with the negotiations told The Associated Press. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the contract had not been completed.
General manager Phil Savage believed if Anderson had gotten an offer from another team, the Browns probably wouldn't have been able to keep him.
The team had been negotiating a three-year, $20 million deal for Anderson.
The 24-year-old signed with Cleveland just hours after he became a restricted free agent.
I guess the grass wasn't greener after all. Or more likely Anderson couldn't find a suitor willing to give him Romo money. I don't blame Anderson and his agent for testing the market; his value will likely never be higher. Now the Browns are bringing the entire offense back, and diving into the free agency/trade market to improve the defense (There are reports the Browns have traded this year's second round pick for Green Bay DT Corey Williams...The Pack had franchised Williams, who had seven sacks last year. The Browns would sign him long term along with giving up the pick. If this goes through the Browns will have no draft picks until the 3rd round.)
As for getting D.A. back, I'm not sure yet how I feel about this move. Savage played this quite well--The Browns didn't give Anderson the moon to come back, and the man did win 10 games last year. However, as has been thoroughly documented this off-season, Anderson slipped during the second half of the year, and played his worst game of the campaign in a must-win situation against the Bengals.
That being said, Anderson is not a "known known" quite yet. He's young and may still have some untapped upside. The dumbest argument I've heard against him is that his play was the direct product of quality skill players and a solid offensive line. I call bullshit--The quarterback is the most important position on the field. It certainly helped Anderson to have a good supporting cast, but he was part of the offense's resurgence as much as anyone surrounding him. Put Frye or Couch in the same situation and I'd bet green money you don't get the same results.I think it's a good idea to give Anderson the keys to this offense for at least one more year rather than "starting over" with Quinn in 2008. The Browns goal next season should be not just going to the playoffs, but going deep. I just wonder what Quinn's thinking right now. Will he be satisfied with sitting on the bench for another season? I do not want the Browns to trade him, and if you've listened to Savage during this process that does not seem like the plan. We shall see.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Thursday, February 28, 2008
I know it seems premature to evaluate the trade after only three games, but I have to call it as I see it for now, with the understanding that there's been almost no time to practice, no time to get in sync, injuries, sickness, and a horribly refereed game that included a travel on a prayer three pointer at the buzzer. But here is my evaluation, player by player...
- Positive - very good defender, quick, good finisher around the basket, can create his own shot, pushes the ball
- Negative - can't shoot*, a bit out of control
- Positive - Strong (and pretty chewy), no hesitation - see negative
- Negative - Shoots WAY too much, from the "Keep Missing, Keep Shooting" school of Larry Hughes*, doesn't have much else of a game
- Positive - Tough, attitude, good rebounder, smart defender
- Negative - Doesn't seem to be the dominant force he was in Detroit, offense, free throws (we pretty much knew what we were getting there)
- Positive - Excellent shooter, smart, all around very good player
- Negative - Not much, may be the steal of the trade deadline
The potential still seems to be very intriguing and positive once everyone gets on the same page. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to Wally, that he will calm down and shoot better. Something about the team right now, as expected, seems to be off and is making me a little nervous. Even Lebron seems lost and the offense seems to have reverted back to two years ago when it was PAINFULLY difficult to generate offense. Hopefully this will change and there will be some more continuity and flow. There's only 20 some games left and I just hope we don't drop in the seedings to far.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Well twenty years after the trade that derailed the "Team of the 90's" and brought Danny Ferry to the Cavaliers, Danny Ferry shakes up the team in a huge way with a three team trade that got a little complicated:
The Cavs sent guards Larry Hughes and Shannon Brown and forwards Drew Gooden and Cedric Simmons to Chicago for center/forward Ben Wallace and forward Joe Smith. The Cavs also received Chicago's second round draft pick in 2009.
The Cavs then acquired guard/forward Wally Szczerbiak and guard Delonte West from Seattle for forwards Ira Newble and Donyell Marshall.My first thought was "Ben Wallace?? He's got the worst contract in the league." Well, actually, he's got the second, and we got rid of the guy with the first. My initial "borrowed" analaysis echoes what Chris Broussard wrote on ESPN.com:
A big key in this deal is that Cleveland didn't lose much. All they really lost was Gooden, but Varejao's emergence this season made Gooden expendable. Varejao was outplaying him, and now they've replaced Gooden with a tougher guy (Ben) and a smarter, more skilled guy (Smith). Two for one.
Hughes was no loss whatsoever. He had no bearing on whether the Cavs won or lost (see the 2006 conference finals vs. Detroit for evidence). And financially, the Cavs got rid of his bad contract without taking on longer contracts.
It's true, Wallace's and Hughes' contracts expire at the same time, so we didn't take on any extra years. And that's important, because given West, Pavlovich, Boobie, and Szczerbiak, you have the shooters you need (and that's ignoring the fact that Hughes' couldn't hit the broad side of a barn most days. I will miss Drew, you don't get a guy that young who contributes a lot that often...but he also fails to contribute a lot. If Ben Wallace can play his role--cleaning up garbage, playing tough against tough big men, and getting out of the way of the scorers--he can be very valuable. Sure, he doesn't have the offensive skill of Gooden, and he's old, but we have other guys to put the ball in the basket. For some reason, the Cavaliers never were sold on Shannon Brown. I still think he might turn out to be a decent player.And I knew I remembered Delonte West from somewhere...
If I hear one more so-called NBA analyst talk about Kobe, Garnett, Paul, or anyone else for MVP (Jeff "Balky" Van Gundy for one) I'm going to go absolutely nuts. Does anyone do more with less than Lebron? When he didn't win it two years ago, I thought it was highway robbery (and I was willing to hear arguments for Kobe that year). Nash winning it was nice, but he had (and still has) twice as much talent around him as Lebron... or Kobe did that year. But if he doesn't win it this year, then I declare it the biggest screwjob since that fateful night in Montreal, when Vince McMahon humiliated Bret Hart in front of his legion of Canadian fans. Of course, I'm talking about The Montreal Screwjob.
Second player in NBA history to record two back-to-back triple doubles in one season (the other being Magic).
I've said it before and I'll say it again... Lebron defines "MVP". To me the MVP isn't simply the best player in the league.... which some hackers refer to as the "MIP" (Most Important Player). It also isn't the person with the best stats, nor is it a person on one of the top teams. It's a combination of all that, but most importantly, it includes what that player means to his team and how that team is affected without him. (See my Nash vs. Lebron or Kobe argument).
"VALUABLE". It's right there in between Most and Player.
By the way, his fourth quarter dunk at the All-Star Game was sick.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
This idiot (Charley Rosen of Fox Sports) grades the NBA teams at the mid-point of the season. He gives the Cavs a C-. Now I'm not saying the Cavs deserve an A or anything, but to have the fourth best record in the East and dealing with injuries and hold outs like they have deserves a little more than a C- don't you think?
But what really confuses me about this guys is that he gives the Suns a C-... they're tied for the best record in the West... the Super-conference that supposedly the Cavs wouldn't even make the playoffs in.
He gives several more questionable grades. Check it out. We get no respect.
Handing out NBA's Midterm Grades by Charley Rosen
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
There is an interesting article about The Great Seal, debunking many myths about it.
Here's the link to the entire article:
Great Seal Secrets Revealed
But the one point that stood out to me (which honestly I think the writers and historians need to recheck their facts about) is the following:
That the phrase "Novus Ordo Seculorum" below the Roman numerals for 1776 at the base of the pyramid translates as "A New Order of the Ages" that began with independence and does not imply the United States will be the lynchpin of a sinister "New World Order."
Do the words Hollywood Hogan, Big Sexy, Sixx Pac, Easy E, or Too Sweeeeeet ring a bell?
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Friday, February 1, 2008
...how bad the Cavs are without LeBron, and how good they are with him. Road wins against San Antonio, Dallas, L.A., and Portland with No. 23 leading the way. A loss against a bad Seattle team last night with LeBron sitting out...which makes Cleveland 0-6 this year without their money man. (It doesn't help that their best energy guy is out at the same time LeBron is riding the pine.) If that's not criteria for league MVP, I don't know what is.