Let's make this clear right off the bat: there are a lot of reasons the Spurs were shockingly swept out of the playoffs. Tim Duncan showed his age, particularly defensively, where the Suns attacked him mercilessly. Tony Parker wasn't ever 100 percent healthy. Manu Ginobili wasn't quite himself, and the vaunted team defense just fell apart against Phoenix's pick and roll.
NBA Playoffs Monday Night Viewing Guide: R.C. Buford Deserves Some Blame For The Spurs’ Sweep
So I’m not writing this to be intentionally edgy or controversial. I recognize it would be moronic to pin the entire Spurs performance on this factor. I also realize this analysis has the benefit of hindsight (though at the same time, GMs are paid to have foresight). But as long as we’re all writing about reasons they failed, let’s submit this one for consideration.
The usually perfect R.C. Buford messed up this summer by trading for Richard Jefferson and, to a lesser extent, not finding the right pieces around the Big 3.
I realize that Buford was in a really tough spot this summer. The Spurs desperately needed to do something before the Duncan/Manu/Parker core faded into the sunset. The 2008/09 season, which was probably the most underwhelming Spurs season of the decade, proved that it probably was going to take more than your typical Spurs bargain hunting to get it done. They needed someone better than Roger Mason or Matt Bonner.
But still, that someone should not have been Richard Jefferson. When the Spurs traded for Jefferson, many glossed over two major red flags with him. First, he wasn't actually good anymore. In his 2008/09 year in Milwaukee, he had a league-average PER and got his points mostly on fadeaway mid-range jumpers. Consider: in his last year with New Jersey, he took nearly six shots a game around the basket, but that number fell to just four in his year with the Bucks. He was never much of a three-point shooter either, so he was getting all his points via the most inefficient shot in basketball.
And that’s the other problem with Jefferson: he was reluctant to shoot threes. Specifically, the corner three. As I mentioned after Game 2:
When the Spurs acquired Jefferson this summer, the move was universally praised because people figured Jefferson would provide some much-needed athleticism to an older Spurs roster. Instead, he’s been a misfit, because he just won’t shoot the corner three, the shot that the Spurs have been so successful exploiting over the years. It’s not that he’s really terrible at it - a glance at his hotspots data proves he is at least capable of making it - it’s more that he refuses to shoot it. Jefferson would rather take a step in and make the 18-footer, which is really bad for San Antonio’s spacing and makes their offense much less efficient.
In other words, Jefferson completely messed up San Antonio’s spacing. The fact that Duncan, Ginobili and Parker struggled so badly offensively at times during the playoffs is no coincidence. It’s harder for them to do their thing when they have less room on the court to work with.
Then, there's the biggest red flag, that Buford seemingly ignored: in two years, Jefferson was traded twice, and the best player the other team got back in either trade was Yi Jianlian. Meanwhile, the Spurs passed on a chance to get John Salmons at the 2009 trade deadline, probably could have gotten Jason Richardson for nothing after Phoenix's disappointing 2008/09 year, missed at getting a guy like Mike Miller, who the Timberwolves were giving away on draft night in 2009 and passed on Vince Carter because they seemingly didn't think he had the right temperament to fit into their culture. Jefferson had all the temperament problems Carter had, and the Spurs still got him even though Carter is a much better player. All those guys have three-point range and would have been much more comfortable spotting up and spacing the floor.
To be clear, I have less of a problem with the Spurs' other moves. The Antonio McDyess signing was fine, though I do think it would have been better for the Spurs to split up the mid-level exception on a cheaper big (maybe Channing Frye?) and a bargain-basement wing who could shoot and play defense (Matt Barnes?). McDyess did his thing, and while it hurt that he didn't have three-point range, it's not the end of the world. The Spurs also have to be credited with drafting DeJuan Blair, though it's damning with faint praise to say they were less stupid than the GMs that passed on him.
But in trading for Jefferson, Buford ignored his core philosophy that won his franchise four titles: find guys who fit the system. Richard Jefferson didn’t, and now, Buford is saddled with an aging team that’s over next year’s luxury tax already with just seven players under contract. They might have to trade Parker just to get better. While some of this might have been unavoidable, some of it could have been with smarter moves from a GM that’s usually one step ahead of everyone else.
I guess every GM makes mistakes. Even R.C. Buford.
Onto tonight, where we could have two more sweeps.
Orlando Magic vs. Atlanta Hawks: Game 4, 8:00 p.m., TNT
Game 3 in one sentence: The Magic destroyed the Hawks again, and afterwards, the Hawks started pointing fingers.
Problem the Hawks must solve to win: This is a cop out, but ... my god, show some damn pride you guys! How can you get blown out at home like that? Your fans think you’re a mediocre team. Show them you aren’t.
(It’s okay, I know you won’t).
Problem the Magic must solve to win again: (Insert lazy analysis about how Vince Carter isn’t clutch).
Totally inconsequential thing I want to see happen: I'm going to be carefully tracking Stan Van Gundy's faces tonight, because this might be the most amazing site I've ever seen.
Prediction: The Hawks have already quit, so there’s no way I’m picking them tonight. Magic 112, Hawks 93.
Los Angeles Lakers at Utah Jazz: Game 4, 10:30 p.m., TNT
Game 3 in one sentence: Thanks in large part to Ron Artest's random good three-point shooting, the Lakers won a classic after Wesley Matthews missed what would have been the game-winning tip-in.
Problem the Jazz must solve to win: Here's how you know the Jazz just don't match up: in Game 3, they double-teamed the post to take away the Lakers' inside advantage, and the Lakers respond by draining a bunch of threes. I'd say the Jazz should be better about how they double-team Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum, but if they don't double-team, they get killed. It's pick your poison, and the Jazz are in a Catch-22. (Sorry for the cliches, I'm normally much better than that).
Problem the Lakers must solve to win again: The Lakers were a bit lucky to win Game 3, because their defense really didn’t show up. The Lakers gave up an obscene 123.6 points per 100 possessions, which won’t work going forward. Had Matthews completed that tip-in, this would be what everyone would talk about.
For the sake of balance, I have to present SB Nation’s Lakers blog Silver Screen and Roll’s argument that the numbers lie.
And for what it’s worth, I don’t think the defense was all that poor yesterday either. Yes, both Utah and LA put up obscene points per possession numbers, and if the proof is in the pudding, the defense was sub-par. But Utah is a very good offensive team, and I don’t know what you can do stop somebody like Kyle Korver just going off. Dude can get his shot up faster than I can pick my nose. And he was shooting from all kinds of awkward positions, shooting without setting his feet, shooting after turning around from the basket. It was as impressive a catch and shoot performance as you will see. Yes, the Lakers lost him a couple times when they shouldn’t have, but give the man some credit for an amazing performance.
[...]
Down the stretch, neither team could get a stop, but it wasn’t because the defenses took a night off. This was playoff basketball at its best, both teams executing their offense so well that the defense just couldn’t keep up.
I disagree, but whatever.
Totally inconsequential thing I want to see happen: Andrei Kirilenko's haircut was a bit disappointing in his first game back from injury. I expect better from you tonight, sir.
Prediction: The Jazz never quit, and they’re too close to breaking through to not get at least one win in this series. Jazz 110, Lakers 100.
See More:
