Cleveland Browns agree to three-year deal with Josh McCown
February 27, 2015Cleveland State falls to Valparaiso
February 28, 2015Whenever the Cavaliers have went to Indiana over the last half-decade, they have been met with crushing defeat. Tonight, it was pretty expected and explained away by the absence of both Kyrie Irving (shoulder) and LeBron James (rest, back). But still, Indiana remains a very rough place for the Cavaliers as they lost their tenth straight in Indianapolis as the shorthanded Cavs had their four game winning streak wiped out. The Pacers used their bruising, gritty way to best the Cavaliers 93-86.
Pacers 93
Cavaliers 86
Box Score
47.7 and 35.5 – That’s the points and shot attempts per game the Cavaliers had to try to replace on Friday night in Indy. After a rough travel night that saw the Cavaliers go home without boarding the plane Thursday night for Indianapolis, LeBron James was given the night off during this grueling stretch of basketball and after he did the heavy lifting in the wine and gold win over Golden State in the Q the night before.
52 – That was the number of shots from Matthew Dellavedova, J.R. Smith, and Iman Shumpert as a result. Those guys are role players and are simply not designed to chuck it up that much and have it hold up consistently. Kevin Love had 19 of his own shots, but no individual really rose to the occasion offensively. In my mind, it had to be either Love or Smith, and while J.R. led the team with 21 points on 6-of-14 shooting, it was not enough.
15-8 – Indiana won the turnover margin, and the Cavalier backcourt suffered immensely without its two best ball handlers. The one area in which the Cavs picked up the slack was in the turnover department. Instead of multiple turnovers from James, Shumpert had 5 of his own, and Delly added 4. The real story here is just 8 turnovers for the Pacers, which is a stellar figure. The Cavaliers made the Pacers take a lot of tough shots, but they got shots on nearly every possession, which softens the blow of 43% shooting.
18:59 – Timofey Mozgov somewhat suspiciously played just under 19 minutes in this one as Kendrick Perkins soaked up his second half minutes in his first extended action as a Cavalier. Mozzy was just 3-for-8 from the field for his 6 points and 6 boards. His counterpart Roy Hibbert had a quiet night as well with 2-of-7 shooting and 8 points.
15-10-12 – Despite going just 4-of-15 from the floor, Pacer point guard George Hill managed to notch a triple-double. When these two last met, it was Hill’s circus shot four-point play that propelled the Pacers to clinching the victory in a huge momentum shift.
0 – The Cavaliers did not manage a single fastbreak point in this one. That’s jaw-dropping, but it is also explained away pretty easily when it’s Delly that you have pushing the tempo. The Aussie is not one to thrive in the transition game. His role is much more to slow the pace and get into the offense. The Pacers meanwhile had 15 transition points of their own.
21-8 – Cleveland came storming out of the gates as they took a large lead in the first six minutes of the game. Matthew Dellavedova hit his first three shots and had two assists in this hot start, but he was just 2-for-15 after that as he posted 14 points, 10 rebounds, and 5 assists. It’s not that Delly doesn’t get through the defense with dribble penetration. It’s not that he isn’t getting high percentage shots. The only problem is that he’s the one shooting them. Indiana more than encouraged Matthew to put a high volume of shots up with a cushion on a perimeter and lanes in the paint. It’s difficult to expect much from him on offense other than catch and shoot threes, and his touch on shots inside the arc is that of someone with ten thumbs on their two hands. The Cavalier backup point guard is just 28-for-91 inside the three-point arc this season, a ghastly sub-31%.
17 and 10 – Kevin Love posted his usual numbers, but that was far from acceptable on a night without James and Irving. He did manage ten points in the paint, but he couldn’t find his touch on the perimeter, and he didn’t demand the ball as much as he needed to. Overall, K-Love was 6-for-19 and only 1-for-7 from three. If you needed an update on Kevin Love’s numbers on back-to-back games this season: 13 games, 36.8% FG, 25.3% 3PT. Love looked visibly uncomfortable out there in the second half, almost undeniably the back spasms playing a role. When James and Irving return, it might make sense to sit Love down, even if it’s only for a week or two. Luckily for the Cavs, there are no back-to-backs in the postseason.
43, 2-of-8, 6 – James Jones got the start in LeBron’s absence, and Mike Miller provided some minutes off the bench. In 43 combined minutes, these two shooters took just eight shots and came up with six points. On the season, the LeBron-tourage has only chipped in 60 threes in 75 combined games played. if these guys aren’t here to shoot, then what exactly are they here for? I’m willing to overlook the defensive shortcomings if the shooters at least try to shoot the ball, especially on a night where the roster being trotted out was begging for people to take shots. It’s better than watching Dellavedova try to chuck up nearly 20 shots.
32-17 – The Cavaliers let it get away from them a bit in the second quarter, getting outscored 32-17. They did not allow more than 23 in any other quarter. In fact, it was just 19 points in both the first and fourth quarters. Rodney Stuckey had 12 of his team high 19 points in the second as he led the Pacers to 50% shooting in the stretch. Stuckey also nailed the three-point dagger with 1:14 left as the Cavaliers had cut it to just a four point hole after trailing by 15. Meanwhile, the Cavs scuffled with just 6-of-25 makes during the same second quarter span.
The Cavaliers should hopefully have both James and Irving back on Sunday afternoon in Houston against the Rockets.
33 Comments
“Whenever the Cavaliers have WENT”? Wow…
OK, “have gone” or “went” should’ve been used there. Did that make you feel special? Did that bring joy to your day?
No, actually. It’s sad that something so basic is missed… Proofread or have someone else do it before you publish…
It is sad when a child goes hungry. When a writer mixes verb tenses late at night while trying to get a recap out so fans who might not have been able to see the game can read it, it is unfortunate but acceptable.
Grid is right, and these basic English errors occur frequently on this site…more often than not followed by defensiveness on the part of WFNY. Yes, there is more of importance in the story than the grammar, but these kinds of issues DO detract from readability for a good number of people. WFNY usually takes itself seriously as a site of sports journalism, but then basic English grammar gets neglected, and the excuse given is that the writer was working late at night (as if writers at other respectable publications wherein these errors do not occur don’t ever write late at night)…
There’s a right and wrong way to bring these type of errors up. Grid wanted to make a scene out of it by putting it in the comments rather than just sending us a message. I love how writers get called “defensive” when they respond to something, as if we’re supposed to stay silent about direct comments. Give me a break.
I admitted my error, but I don’t take much stock in people that have commented one time on the site going “Wow…” Why don’t you send me something you wrote in 45 minutes time? I guarantee I can find more grammar mistakes than I have in my piece above.
We frequently have stories undergo an editorial process prior to publication, but our Behind The Box Scores sometimes don’t because they’re being written in 45-60 minutes after the game late at night. We’re not the Associated Press nor are we ever going to be. If you don’t like it, there’s the door.
Okay, here you are being defensive again. You aren’t simply “responding to something” when you say “If you don’t like it, there’s the door.” Might as well tell me to go root for Buffalo.
My offer still stands. If all you want to do is exist in the comments section to correct grammatical errors (and that’s basically what you do), then that is a sad existence.
That’s basically what I do?? You must be conflating me with Grid. I have certainly corrected some grammatical errors, but if you actually took the time to look at my comments in the comments section, you would find that I much more often contribute to conversations about the substance of the posts. Now you are being both defensive and petty (in addition to inaccurate). You are basically telling me to go root for Buffalo. What a jerk!
While I’m not about to dig through your commenting history, Kirk’s point is that there are multiple ways to let someone know there’s a grammatical error in a piece. As an editor, I receive emails, direct messages on Twitter, and other behind-the-scenes mediums over the years that make me aware of items which should at least consider a word swap. I log in, swap them out and everyone gets to carry on with their experience.
BtBS and WWW are written at times—either late night or first thing in the morning—where some issues slip through the cracks. “WFNY usually takes itself seriously as a site of sports journalism, but then basic English grammar gets neglected, and the excuse given is that the writer was working late at night (as if writers at other respectable publications wherein these errors do not occur don’t ever write late at night)…” It’s not the writer’s fault as I’m sure the respectable publications you refer to also have grammatical issues. The difference with us is that we don’t have a paid editorial staff on the clock at all times like said publications. We would much prefer getting you the content following a game than have you have to wait until 10a the next day. If that means some sloppy syntax or a misspelled word, I’m willing to take that gamble.
Kirk’s issue isn’t with the pointing out of the error, it’s how it was pointed out and then subsequently piled on by someone who has been around these parts to see the effort we put into this site on a daily basis. There are right ways and wrong ways. He worked very hard, very late (on a Friday night, no less) to get these words up immediately following a game, and every comment attached to the piece is now only reflecting one word out of the thousand-plus he wrote, none of which has to do with the actual game or the players. It’s not constructive, and it’s not what we expect out of our commenters.
I didn’t pile on. I defended the original commenter. There was no need for Kirk to give the flippant response, “Did that make you feel special? Did that bring joy to your day?” He could have just said “Thanks for the correction, and in the future, would you mind sending such corrections to us in email?”.
If anything, mgbode “piled on” against the original commenter.
I get that you guys work hard, and that there isn’t a paid editorial staff. I like you guys and this blog, except for a tendency that you guys have exhibited to be overly defensive when subjected to critique.
I recall a time when you guys unveiled a bunch of new changes to the site and asked for suggestions, and I offered (in the comments) to help a bit with editing if you wanted. I think it was actually you, Scott, who gave a positive acknowledgment to my offer — though nothing’s materialized (not that I followed up about it, either). I just want to be clear that my intentions are positive, and I have good reason to be put off by Kirk’s telling me to buzz off.
“These basic English errors occur frequently on this site.” is nothing but piling on, Mat. We’re always willing to bring helpful, passionate people aboard as this helps the cause; calling out grammatical issues in the comments does not. If you wish to take this discussion offline, you know where to find me.
I intended what you quoted as a substantial defense of Grid’s comment. I see how you regard it as “piling on,” though, and it’s not an unreasonable interpretation — but also not 100% correct. So, I disagree with you; it is not “nothing but piling on.” Honestly, it’s an empirically verifiable fact and Grid was not incorrect. The only problem here seems to be that Grid wasn’t discreet in pointing it out (and perhaps this is a problem that Kirk and perhaps others have with me). It is natural for someone reading a blog to use the Comments section to leave a comment. If you want readers to direct certain varieties of critique to email, maybe be more explicit about that. What about a correction of a statistic cited in a story? What about a correction of an interpretation of events? Where are the lines, exactly?
P.S. — from the “Before You Comment” section:
“Furthermore, personal attacks and insults will not be tolerated. It’s
possible to argue about sports without belittling those with whom we
disagree. Debating the facts and the merits of opinions is not only
accepted, but encouraged at WFNY; however, visitors who resort to
attacking others risk an IP ban. Commenting at WFNY is not a right; it
is a privilege.”
It seems to me that Kirk violates guideline when writing, “Thank you, Mr. Anonymous Grid, for crawling out of your dungeon to bless us with your presence in this comments section. I’m going to go work on
verb tenses. You should work on tone and social skills.”
Again, it is with only positive intentions that I point this out. We can critique grammar or whatever more discreetly — fine. But you guys can also abide by the rules you’ve created. The WFNY atmosphere is a product of WFNY staff and its readership. It’s not just on us.
“It’s possible to argue about sports without belittling…”
That’s EXACTLY what Grid did to start this discussion. And it’s EXACTLY what you’ve done with your tone on several occasions in the past, including in this one. Don’t act so innocent, hiding behind the disguise of site improvement.
You have no idea how infuriating it is to receive an anonymous comment with belittling tone for one grammatical error in 1k words. I’m not grammatically perfect, but I like to think I normally do a pretty good job.
Grid wrote, ”
“Whenever the Cavaliers have WENT”? Wow…”
Maybe that’s belittling you; maybe it’s not. In my opinion, there’s not enough there to be certain, though what you said to Grid was very clearly belittling.
Now you say I’m belittling and that I am acting innocent and hiding behind the disguise of site improvement. Are you serious?? Why can’t you accept the possibility that I have given a rational defense of Grid and a rational critique of you and the site, and that these things can happen from a position of appreciation of the site? In fact, I do hope for WFNY’s improvement and have enjoyed watching its continual improvement over the past several years — much appreciated by a native Clevelander who has moved around a lot due to work. I agree with you that you normally do a pretty good job. And I don’t even care about your grammatical error in this story. What I care about is the unprofessional way you treated Grid and are treating me.
That’s a two-way street. I extend courtesy to those that display it. For those that don’t, well, you’ve seen what happens.
The notion that the “Wow…” comment on the end isn’t belittling is absurd. Your critiques of our editorial process are not. They are noted, and we have explained why these things happen from time to time. Let’s move on.
It’s not absurd. Grid was obviously criticizing your grammar, and perhaps indeed with this being his only comment, he was belittling the significance of your piece by just focusing on that. But it was not necessarily belittling of you *as a person*. But I do see what you said to Grid as clearly belittling of Grid *as a person.*
Two-way street — fine. But since you dole out advice to others to work on tone and social skills, you might consider the possibility that a critical comment could come from someone who does not intend a lack of courtesy. Tone is often hard to convey clearly on the internet (not that you need me to tell you that). If you were being discourteous in reply to perceived discourtesy from Grid, I get it (though we may agree to disagree on whether that’s the right way to deal with it). But I’m not attempting any discourtesy in this discussion — whether you want to accuse me of “playing” or “acting” or whatever.
I have removed the comment above. I think I’m well within my rights as a contributor and comment moderator to respond as such when a person who is not a part of the regular comment community leaves a grammatical jab and walks away. Saying that they need to work on their tone and implying that it was a troll-ish comment seems pretty minor, rather than the great violation that you seek.
But, you are correct in that it is against the spirit of our comments section. Consequently, I have removed it. In the future, I would ask you and others to think about how your comment comes across before leaving it when read by the person that worked incredibly hard on a Friday night.
Unfortunately, first impressions are very important. If the first sentence of an article contains such an egregious error, it’s difficult for some, perhaps not all, to give credence to the subsequent content of the article. I should have sent an email, so I apologize for that. I do resent your responses to my comments, however, I can see how you felt personally attacked. That was not my intention. Still, you do come off as defensive. After reading the rest of the article, it is well written and did a nice job of detailing the events of the game. I am an avid reader of this site, and enjoy the great content provided. Keep up the good work. Go Cavs!
I appreciate you coming back to further explain your comment. Had you added the rest of your second comment to your first comment, I likely would not have even responded. Thank you for the kind words.
I will work on the defensiveness in the future.
This comment thread, and particularly the responses to Laundromat’s precise and measured comments, makes me sad.
Kirk, it offends many commenters when you overreact and tell one who used a tone that offended you to take a hike. Just like if you were in a game crowd and a player flipped off another fan for saying something he didn’t like. The end game of your response is not necessarily kinder comments, it’s primarily a loss of respect for your inability to respond in a more mature matter. And Laundromat is right: readers have a right to expect editors/writers to conform to the site’s own guidelines (something we touched on regarding another subject just a few weeks ago).
I had no idea you guys preferred suggested corrections via email – I incorrectly felt this would be more insulting and intrusive, but now I see my view was not sensitive to the public embarrassment issue. I pretty much stopped all my own correcting because while, like Grid, that stuff makes me a little nuts, I just didn’t want to be that guy anymore.
Most of all I implore you not to tell commenters to take a hike. It’s amateurish, and it drags down all the other writers and the site with you. Ignore it, delete it, or respond with politeness (you might be surprised at how that modifies behavior). But don’t go off like that on one of the many you write for.
If I may offer a suggestion/solution to this issue if/when it happens again (and I hope I’m not overstepping here): as we commenters are required to have an email address attached to our profiles, perhaps have a canned response that can be emailed to the commenter, something along the lines of “We appreciate you taking the time to read and for your concern for the quality of the articles. In the future, we would appreciate it if you would email us with errors or corrections. Thank you again for your patronage.” The comment can also be deleted to prevent discussion. For those who don’t frequent here and therefore don’t know that’s how you would prefer to be notified, now they will. And if they continue to highlight errors publicly after being “warned,” then you know it’s malicious and can be dealt with appropriately. And for those that come in under “Guest” and perhaps don’t have an email address, the comment can still be deleted.
Now back to the sports!
I appreciate the response, Harv. While I don’t agree with where you’re taking this with the analogies, I see your point.
While it’s true that I am working on being less defensive, if you guys saw the volume of less than flattering and downright mean-spirited comments that we can be subjected to on here as well as Twitter on a daily basis, then you’d occasionally feel inclined to stick up for yourself or your fellow WFNY writers.
We do this for free, taking time away from our friends and family to do it. It takes five seconds to fire off a comment ridiculing a 1k word piece that sometimes takes hours. There’s an imbalance there that is often lost.
All I can try to do is improve in the future, but a little bit of understanding from the other side of the fence wouldn’t hurt anything either.
Interesting suggestion, JNeids. It’s one that I may consider in the future. It’s not fun to have one comment on a piece and have it be about an error in the opening sentence.
Not that anybody asked for my opinion, but all this needless hostility would have been avoided if Kirk would have done what I try to do when I make an obvious mistake. I say, “Oops, my bad.” That would have ended the matter right then and there. (Although I admit on occasion I’ve snapped at criticism too.) The trick is to not take it personally.
I too have always thought that some of the writers here are way too defensive about critiques of grammar and spelling, and it’s not becoming. Other writers are most certainly not defensive, and I think they are respected for it because they are secure in their abilities and don’t take offense to the fact that they’re not perfect. This may not be your livelihood, but I assume you are getting paid something for it (not enough I’m sure). So I think that as professional writers you should take pride in the basics of the language. You’re putting your name on it.
I noticed that this “have went” thing also popped up in an article by another writer that was posted on Friday. I’m sure it was noticed by others too, but no one commented on it. That’s twice in one day. Come on, a person should be embarrassed to write something like that. This gets you a big red X in fourth grade!
And being angry that such criticisms aren’t passed along privately is childish. We’re all big boys. If you find such critiques so insulting, then just delete them.
Without nitpicking, I’ll continue to point out unacceptable grammar and misspellings when I think they deserve it, and I’ll try to do it with good humor and hope it’s taken the same way.
And if this wasn’t such a great, great site written by such interesting and dedicated people, I wouldn’t care what you did.
Wow. Tough loss for the Cavs, eh?
“I pretty much stopped all my own correcting because while, like Grid, that stuff makes me a little nuts, I just didn’t want to be that guy anymore.”
Yeah. Me, too. I started doing it in good fun, but thought that it might be a little overbearing (Kirk and Scott have here confirmed as much). Now I just like to correct the grammar of those correcting grammar. I find it so much more ironically fun.
That was my other reason: the tremendous downside of even the smallest error in my haughty correction.
Today I’m typing with bandaids on 2 fingers and I’m ripe for the pickin.’
Anymore, I reserve my sharpshooting for trolls. The “community” has generally earned a reprieve from my barbs. I’m a benevolent dictator, after all.
http://www.quickmeme.com/img/da/daa4a9fcf718659d45fd0528fd6ae30fc1345e8dfc1d42fcf6ae39f3951dda37.jpg