Wednesday, June 24th, 2009...12:01 am
Some Thoughts on the Jefferson Trade
Ed. Note: I apologize for my recent absence. I began graduate school on Monday so, needless to say, my life has been a bit hectic the last few days. Once I get a better sense of my schedule, I’ll be back in full force. But I couldn’t let yesterday’s events pass without offering some comment.
As you know, yesterday the Spurs acquired Richard Jefferson for Bruce Bowen, Kurt Thomas and Fabricio Oberto. I agree with the general consensus: The Spurs have made a smart move and have firmly placed themselves back into the hunt for a 5th title. According to our friendly neighborhood Bucks blogger, this isn’t such a bad move for Milwaukee either. But there have been a few naysayers, and rightfully so. Few trades are all reward and no risk. That being said, I think some of the criticisms that have popped up are misguided and I want to take this opportunity to respond. I also want to raise a few concerns of my own:
Some questions have been raised regarding Richard Jefferson’s attitude. He has developed a reputation as a problem in the locker room, and in some people’s mind his acquisition has put the Spurs much-heralded chemistry at some amount of risk. Personally, I am not that concerned. Jefferson went from a devolving situation in New Jersey to a dead end situation in Milwaukee (Yes, the Bucks were in striking distance of the playoffs but, as Jeremy Schmidt himself admitted, A Jefferson-Redd led team was never going beyond the first round). Few players would survive such a transition without some negative press about their “attitude.”
In all honesty, I think there are plenty of reasons to be quite optimistic about the attitude and energy Jefferson will bring: Jefferson has his best, and what may be last, opportunity to win a ring this next season. And he didn’t have to sacrifice a dime to get it. I see no reason why we can’t expect 82 games of ear-to-ear grins from number 24.
You know the interesting thing about this speculation regarding Jefferson and his attitude? For one man it isn’t speculation: Gregg Popovich. Popovich served as an assistant coach on the 2003 FIBA U.S. Men’s National Team and on the 2004 Olympic Team, both of which Jefferson played on. Popovich hasn’t merely scouted Jefferson; he has coached him directly. No one in the organization is in a better position to judge Jefferson’s attitude than Coach Pop. And if Popovich is a believer than I am as well.
On a similar but slightly different note, take a look at the elite small forwards the Spurs have targeted in the last 12 months: Corey Maggette, Vince Carter, Richard Jefferson. Jefferson is easily the least established “head case” of the three.
Aaron Stampler of Pounding the Rock pointed out that Jefferson had a rather poor +/- this past season. In fact, with -104 he had the second worst +/- on the team. I think this is an excellent opportunity to point out the fundamental problem with the +/- metric: There are always 4 other guys in your same jersey with you on the court. And every time one of those guys allows a basket or fails to score, that affects your +/-. When you are Matt Bonner, and you start alongside Tim Duncan and Tony Parker, you could accidentally end up with the highest +/- on the team. When you are Richard Jefferson and you not only start alongside Charlie Bell and Dan Gadzuric but also primarily play against other team’s starting 5, you may end up with a terrible +/-. I’ll readily admit his PER this last season (15.45) was low considering his salary but I think his +/- is a misleading stat.
Before moving on to my criticisms, I want to propose an idea which I have yet to do the appropriate research for: One legitimate point of concern many commentators have noted is how dangerously close this move puts the Spurs to the luxury tax. If the Spurs are going to finish rounding out this roster (after yesterday’s events, the the frontcourt is certainly in need of a little depth), they will most likely have to head north of the cap. For many this has come as a surprise given how closely associated the Spurs are with the ethic of frugality. (Although, as R.C. Buford said during an interview yesterday afternoon, “this won’t be the first time we’ve been a luxury tax paying team.”)
I have a theory. This past season the Spurs experienced an uncommon financial shock. They received the revenue from only three home playoff games. By some estimates, a franchise can make close to $1 million per playoff home game. Although it would be an enormous gamble, the Spurs may be preparing to defy our expectations and absorb the luxury tax in the hopes that the excess revenue from a deep playoff run will offset the costs. I will do some research and try to find out how much the team made in ‘07, ‘08, and ‘09. If there was a significant drop in the Spurs ‘09 revenue, there may be some truth to this idea. (I’m hardly the first person to propose that this business strategy may work for an NBA team, but I have never seen hard numbers that prove its validity.)
At this point, my primary concern is our frontcourt depth. Matt Bonner is unacceptable as a starting center. With players like James Gist and Ian Mahinmi in the pipeline, we are in an excellent position to pad the end of the bench but, if we legitimately intend to compete this season, we need a frontcourt contributor we don’t currently possess. As Tim said to me late yesterday evening, “We have roster spots 1 through 6 and 9 through 12. We need 7 and 8.”
We also still need some depth at the small forward position (Who will backup Jefferson? Udoka?), but that can be more readily solved by the draft. If we do choose a small forward, Jefferson’s acquisition does take a fair amount of pressure off of that young man: Instead of praying that he will grow into a semi-legitimate starter by mid-season, he can contribute 10-15 minutes off of the bench and develop comfortably and calmly.
At the end of yesterday, there were some questions that still hung in the air. But all in all, this is a trade I am excited about. Had we allowed those contracts to expire and waited for the 2010 free agent class, we would have quietly suffered last season’s fate while Duncan and Ginobili grew a year older. Add on the fact that the 2010 FA market would be a free-for-all full of attractive buyers, giving us no assurances the Spurs would land the caliber of player we sought. We had an opportunity to compete now and we took it. Given the ages of Duncan and Manu, I’m glad we did.
33 Comments
June 24th, 2009 at 2:10 am
I’ve followed the Nets for a while now, but before the year Kidd was traded, there was never any incident of locker room issues with Jefferson. He’s always been a good guy from what I’ve seen, it was just from that year that he started getting frustrated, as did everyone else on that team.
June 24th, 2009 at 3:23 am
The Spurs have undoubtably said that they have 2 years left to win. Timmy and Manu have about 2 good years left and R.C. and co. realize this. I remember a past article that ended with, “We will not go gentle…” Well, the Spurs have just shouted that once again but this time it’s about the carreers of Duncan & Ginobili.
June 24th, 2009 at 4:49 am
RC is also saying Parker (27) and Jefferson (29) are our transition stars from the Manu and Duncan period. This is something Graydon touched on in his “Not to Trade Parker” piece.
June 24th, 2009 at 6:42 am
Just a random thought… doesnt getting RJ make Manu/Tony more “tradeable” for a quality big and a decent guard?
June 24th, 2009 at 7:02 am
Michael Finley should be an above-average backup small forward. I think we’re fine there. I do agree that we need a starting-quality big man; the Spurs should be able to get something serviceable off the bench out of the combo of Mahinmi/Gist/Bonner, but I don’t think those guys are ready for starter’s minutes or responsibility.
June 24th, 2009 at 7:27 am
why is no one mentioning the mid-season acquisition of Drew Gooden as a potential replacement for what the Spurs lost when they gave up Kurt Thomas? Is he definitely not staying with the organization? Am I missing something?
June 24th, 2009 at 7:30 am
I agree that Pop is probably the best judge of character out of everyone. And people tend to listen in the Spurs’ system. The culture in the locker room is just different. If the Spurs can bring in Big Dog Robinson and Mighty Mouse, I’m confident Jefferson will fit in.
I’m optimistic we’ll have a quality starting center. I agree that Matt Bonner is not a starting center, but he does space the floor nicely. He’s a great big to come off the bench.
June 24th, 2009 at 7:31 am
Navin,
Tony and Manu have excellent contracts and are excellent players. You don’t trade for an excellent player with a horrible contract just to trade one of the excellent contracts you already have. You can’t get equal value. Our FO is, without a doubt, saying we have a big 4 now. Trading Manu as salary dump doesn’t even make sense since taking back 80% of his $10 million would still be $8 million. Our franchise wouldn’t trade Manu to save $2 million dollars. That would be a Titanic sized blunder.
When Manu’s contract is up at the end of the season though, Spurs will have the inside track at signing him but we might have to open our wallets.
June 24th, 2009 at 7:49 am
The best next move is signing Rasheed Wallace or Marcin Gortat with the MLE.
Wallace is much better than Matt Bonner as our starting center. He is a championship level competitor and I would love to have him on the team.
Gortat played phenomenal defense throughout the playoffs, rebounded, blocked shots, and threw in dunks. He is a starting quality center.
Add either of those guys and I say the Spurs are the favorites to win the title.
June 24th, 2009 at 8:46 am
Graydon,
FYI, the Spurs played three home playoff games this year. Game 5 just felt like it was in Dallas.
Your point is still valid though. More games means more money. I would love to know how the Spurs front office and ownership makes those financial decisions. How much of it is business and how much of it is wanting to win?
June 24th, 2009 at 9:26 am
“The best next move is signing Rasheed Wallace or Marcin Gortat with the MLE. ”
I agree on Marcin Gortat, if can sign him for $3 million dollars a year and wouldn’t offer more. But Rasheed Wallace is just too expensive taking in consideration luxury tax….
June 24th, 2009 at 10:04 am
Gortat would be nice, but what really has he done to show that he could be a full-time starter? And for the money?
The best move the Spurs could make, in my opinion, is trying to free Euroleague star David Andersen from the Hawks for their first-, or maybe their second-r0und pick. Andersen, a 6-11 Aussie playing for Barcelona, has been pining for a spot in the Association for some time now. He has an escape clause in his contract that he can exercise by July 15, but it seems that all Atlanta has been willing to offer is a non-guaranteed tender. They’ve been hesitant to trade him too, which is why he’s not in the league as of now.
Andersen’s younger than Oberto when he joined the Spurs (29), and while he’s a marginal defender/rebounder, he’s a good 3-point and mid-range shooter on the international level. I bet they could manage to score him for far less than the mid-level exception, and he’d be a great 15-20 minute-a-night guy, with a chance to fill in as a cheap starter with a little more size than Bonner.
June 24th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Excuse my diatribe:
Might Bruce Bowen be the Most Valuable Player ever?
Excuse my little diatribe:
Value is difficult to define in the NBA. Debates have raged over how to quantify value for the MVP award. There is little ambiguity when a team talks about a “value player” with respect to salary or a “value pick” in the draft. Clearly this refers to the service-provided/cost ratio. Though always neglected in MVP talk, I find it inconceivable that the word value can be discussed without the consideration of cost.
That said, we must quantify two things: 1) service-provided and 2) cost. Cost is simple, look at salaries, with one caveat: rookie contracts (we will not consider). Service-provided, on the other hand, is not a simple measure, despite an ever proliferating multitude of statistics. One constant in the evaluation of service-provided is that defense is always undervalued. We will not do that here as simple math reveals two things: 1) half the game is defense, and 2) defense wins championships.
If you look at the NBA all-defensive teams from 2000-1 to 2007-8, Bruce Bowen was a 1st or 2nd teamer each year. The average salary of the others on these lists is well over $10M/yr. No one else making anywhere near Bowen’s salary was on these lists more than once. There is NO other player who appears with such consistency on ANY award list (MVP, all-NBA, etc.) that has such a dramatic discrepancy between his salary and the average of the other winners. Now we’re beginning to understand the true meaning of value.
Next point, Bruce Bowen wears three championship rings. A rings/salary ratio for NBA starters is an easy statistic to calculate (John Hollinger, anyone?), and I would guess Bowen tops that list as well.
These are not insignificant statistics - we’re talking about all-whatever teams and championship rings. Both are profound measures of service-provided, and when cost is included in the calculation, and it must be when talking VALUE, it is clear that Bruce Bowen is the Most Valuable Player ever.
Two other quick points. 1) Bruce’s ability to spread the floor with 3-pt shooting was invaluable in a Duncan-centric offense. 2) While Jefferson is a greater “talent”, ask Manu who will now be guarding Kobe Bryant how “valuable” Bruce was in the mid-part of this decade.
June 24th, 2009 at 10:34 am
Wayne,
Fixed. Thanks for keeping an eye out. I’m in J school and if this were for class I would have received an F for that error alone.
June 24th, 2009 at 10:52 am
Pressurez,
On “While Jefferson is a greater “talent”, ask Manu who will now be guarding Kobe Bryant how “valuable” Bruce was in the mid-part of this decade.”, Bowen is coming back so he’ll still guard Kobe some. Now ask the Bucks who they have worthy of having Bruce defend him when we play them twice next season….
I guess Redd but guarding their team just became a lot easier.
The Bucks have won 4 of the last 6 games against us and 5 of the last 8. They owed us this trade after they cost us the 2 seed last season.
June 24th, 2009 at 11:46 am
I like the trade due to the fact of the added athleticism RJ brings. We lost several games due to not being athletic enough in crunchtime. I think they should bring back Gooden. He is still young and he wants to play here. He has passion and a chip on his shoulder. Think of this lineup both offensively and defensively: TD, Gooden, RJ, Manu and Tony, scoring and rebounds and defense all around. Now is the time to Win it All in an Even Year! Go Spurs!!!!!!!!!!!
June 24th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Yeah, my post about Bruce was mostly tongue-in-cheek, but I do think his career doesn’t get the respect it deserves.
In no way does this mean I don’t support the trade, love it actually. Absolutely love it. Looking forward to seeing what happens tomorrow and the rest of the summer.
I’m going to predict the Spurs draft Paul Harris or Jonas Jerebko as a Bowen replacement.
June 24th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Wojnarowski of Yahoo Sports:
Oberto, who was traded to the Detroit Pistons in a three-way deal with the Milwaukee Bucks and will be bought out by the Pistons in a salary-cap move, will likely return to San Antonio as a free agent. … There’s no chance Bowen returns to the Spurs if the Bucks buy him out as well. His relationship with Gregg Popovich deteriorated with his dwindling role a year ago, and that partnership is over. …
June 24th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Oh, and Manu is not going to guard Kobe, that is Georgie Hill’s job, along with Jefferson, Gist?!, and Manu.
June 24th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
If anything I think RJ is a follower. He wont be a problem in SA
June 24th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
G,
I’m a stickler for facts when it isn’t something I’m involved with.
June 24th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Anyone want to answer Casper’s question? I’ve been pondering the same thing: Drew Gooden was pretty not bad from what I saw. In fact it seemed like he was the only non-starter who would ever score in the playoffs at times. Anything on him? Even a mention?
June 24th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
He’s not a great fit defensively. Pop gave him a DNP-CD in the final playoff game.
June 24th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
I think the Jefferson trade is great. He will fill the SF spot better than anyone has since the days of Sean Elliott. But for us to become a true multi-year contender we need a young talented big man to start next to Timmy. If we can do this, and soon, Timmy will be able to play until he’s 38 like David Robinson. If we don’t Timmy will be burnt out in 2, 3 years tops.
June 24th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
I just read that Wojnarowski Yahoo article and saw that same line about Bowen and Pop’s relationship that Chris K pointed out above…
Any truth to that?
June 24th, 2009 at 10:47 pm
I don’t know whether the relationship between Pop and Bowen truly has deteriorated, but Bowen has already said himself that if he gets bought out buy the Bucks, his first choice of team to go to would be the Spurs. He said it in that video that is posted right on this website.
June 25th, 2009 at 5:55 am
Guys,great comments by everyone. I enjoyed reading them.
Even if Bowen comes back, he will get less minutes because of jr and
June 25th, 2009 at 5:59 am
And the uprise of hill.
On gooden, he creates his own shot, that’s an asset that doesn’t have bonner. I just think that if gooden stays, hell learn the system better.
June 25th, 2009 at 10:51 am
gooden still have that “sports hernia” injury?
if he’s not 110% please do not sign him!
June 25th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Am I still the only person that thinks we should try to get as much value as possible out of a Roger Mason trade before anything else?
June 26th, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Pop has stated that Jefferson will draw the tough defensive assignment.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:53 am
Jefferson’s PER is a bit of a worry. Obviously, the trade would be even better if he were a better rebounder and passer than he is, with all else held equal.
But the importance of PER can be overestimated in this case. PER measures all-around output, but I think there’s one aspect of output that we were looking for above all others at this position: perimeter offense, especially being able to create his own shots. And offensively, Jefferson looks pretty good to me. His FG% last season wasn’t exceptional (.44), but this is somewhat balanced by his high 3FG% (.397) and his good FT% (.805). His true shooting was .554. I didn’t do a really exhaustive search, but found that this is lower than Danny Granger’s and Manu Ginobili’s, but higher than: Joe Johnson’s (.534), Hedo Turkoglu’s (.541) and Richard Hamilton (.521 last year; his highest was .553 in 2005-06).
Equally importantly, he’s athletic and can create his own shot. He can do some of the things Manu does, with which we’re a very good team, without which we get bounced in the first round.
Finally, I don’t think PER really measures defense at all. Look at Bruce Bowen’s PER. From what I read, it sounds like Jefferson is a serviceable defender, if not a “defensive ace”.
So Jefferson looks to me like he’s maybe close to average “all around”, but well above average offensively. Should be a great fit.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:54 am
Jaceman: that makes sense to me. I feel like we have more than enough 3 point shooters. Mason had a very good regular season, and we could probably get something for him, though I don’t see him as really necessary to our offense how that Finley’s coming off the bench.
Leave a Reply