Some quick thoughts

I've been busy, but I want to share just a few thoughts on just a few things:

• I've heard some people call the Cavs' win on Saturday over the Celtics "troubling," or words to that effect. Like them, I didn't enjoy seeing our boys fall behind early, but I sure did enjoy watching them claw their way back into it and pull away at the end. These Celtics may not be quite as talented as they were when they won the title two years ago, but this is still a very good Celtics team. I would be delighted to see three more games against them go exactly the way this one did.

• Our man LeBron James has been named MVP for the second year in a row. Yawn. ... Don't get me wrong, LeBron had an outstanding season and certainly deserves the award. But I find it hard to care who gets the hardware. I'm interested in results on the court. And I'm far more interested in whether LeBron is still in Cleveland when he wins his third MVP.

• Speaking of LeBron, he says his elbow feels about the same as it did at the end of the series against the Bulls. Given that he shot his last free throw in that series left-handed but came back with 35/7/7 in Game 1 against the Celtics, I find that kind of hard to believe. But only LeBron knows what LeBron feels like.

• The Indians pulled out an exciting 11-inning win over the first-place Twins on Saturday, but came back with a lackluster effort yesterday that included the trifecta of poor clutch hitting, poor pitching and poor defense. The Indians gave up 20 hits in that 8-3 loss. Twenty freaking hits! The Twins stranded 16 runners, including at least one in every inning but the fifth. The 2010 Indians are not that bad a team, but they're clearly inferior to those Twins.

• A recent Wall Street Journal study found that the Indians are baseball's most hated team. How can this be? Local fans are obviously not impressed by the current crop of Indians, but they can't be more hated than the Yankees, can they? Well, according to Page 2's Jim Caple, the study was not intended the way it was taken:

But it turns out Cleveland ... [is] not hated ... The Journal simply misinterpreted the analysis. A Nielsen rep told the New York Daily News that its rankings were based merely on positive-and-negative feelings generated by teams from their performances the first three weeks of the season. They were not meant to show whether at team was most-hated or most-liked overall. Which explains why teams off to bad or disappointing starts ranked poorly, as well as the Yankees whose lofty standards require that anything short of a ticker-tape parade by May is considered disappointing by their fans.

Whew!