Exclusive Interview with RC Buford

[Blackjack]

If you have a hole, the best thing to do is have options. Something this team doesn't have enough of at the three.

I agree. But if you have a hole and the options outside your program aren't better than what you have, I'd just assume they go with what they've got; find out exactly what the likes of Temple, Anderson and Gee can give em defensively on the wing - allow them the minutes early to develop instead of playing another Bogans.

In my view, this team doesn't need another skill player on the wing, they need a good-sized defender; preferably with a 3-point shot (which ain't all that easy to find).

If there's a player that proves to be appreciably better than what they've currently got in tow at the wing defensively during camp, then by all means. ... I'm all for it. There's just no one that comes to mind and the Spurs would have to be pretty damn fortunate to land a rotation player via free agency at this stage of the game.

It's very possible the Spurs will need a trade and not be able to pull one off, at least not one sufficient enough.

It is what it is. ... It's just reality, not any kind of indictment.

[TD 21]

I agree. But if you have a hole and the options outside your program aren't better than what you have, I'd just assume they go with what they've got; find out exactly what the likes of Temple, Anderson and Gee can give em defensively on the wing - allow them the minutes early to develop instead of playing another Bogans.

Instead of handing the vet playing time over younger players just because of their vet status, it should be an ongoing compe ion throughout training camp/preseason for playing time and a constant battle throughout the season, unless one player emerges as the unequivocal, clear cut better option.

In my view, this team doesn't need another skill player on the wing, they need a good-sized defender; preferably with a 3-point shot (which ain't all that easy to find).

If there's a player that proves to be appreciably better than what they've currently got in tow at the wing defensively during camp, then by all means. ... I'm all for it. There's just no one that comes to mind and the Spurs would have to be pretty damn fortunate to land a rotation player via free agency at this stage of the game.

It's very possible the Spurs will need a trade and not be able to pull one off, at least not one sufficient enough.

It is what it is. ... It's just reality, not any kind of indictment.

Hayes is the best option available. Sure, he's mediocre, but he's got good size for a three, is a decent three-point shooter and at times throughout his career has been considered a decent defender.

Like I said, I'm not advocating playing him over Anderson and Gee just because he's a veteran, I'm simply saying he'd provide another option, in case those guys aren't ready, aren't good enough, or injury strikes. Right now, there is no fallback in case any of those issues arise.

[Solid D]

I'm not a Jarvis Hayes fan. He's never played much defense in any game I've seen him play. Matador.

[Blackjack]

Hayes is the best option available. Sure, he's mediocre, but he's got good size for a three, is a decent three-point shooter and at times throughout his career has been considered a decent defender.

Like I said, I'm not advocating playing him over Anderson and Gee just because he's a veteran, I'm simply saying he'd provide another option, in case those guys aren't ready, aren't good enough, or injury strikes. Right now, there is no fallback in case any of those issues arise.

But what's the other option, honestly?

I understand what you're getting at as far as another body and vet to add but Hayes is an offensive player that's never shown the ability to defend. If the Spurs are going to add someone on the wing, that player needs to be able to defend. Hayes just ain't that guy - good size and a nice jumper but he only takes up a roster spot, he doesn't address a need.

Unless the Spurs can find someone who can really get into people -- preferably in a 6-6 or up frame -- I just don't see the wisdom in bringing a player like Hayes in, to say nothing of the potential LT implications if you believe the guy's more than a flier and someone you'd intend on keeping for the duration of the season.

[ElNono]

Hayes is the best option available. Sure, he's mediocre

Do I really need to read past this?

[Solid D]

Haven't been on much recently, Solid. I saw the interview but I'm not up to speed with the board as much as usual - was just trying to help a brother out.

In retrospect, I was perhaps a bit grouchy at that point in the day and less clear than I should have been regarding the question to be asked, so I apologize.

We'd all like to know what's going on inside Pop's head because the backup SF picture is...well...almost a blank canvass.

[dbestpro]

Would love some kind of trade for Luc Mbah a Moute.

[Solid D]

I believe a key game early in the season will be @ PHX on Wednesday, Nov. 3rd. The Suns won't have Amare...and that's big...but the Suns just added, yet, another long SF in Hedo. The Spurs won 1 of 7 meetings with the Suns last year and if Jason Richardson hadn't missed a wide open dunk in the last minute (to tie), the Spurs may have gone 0-fer against the Suns.

Can the Spurs defend the size and outside shooting of the Suns wing players? Can the Spurs switch and rotate quickly enough to keep the Suns from killing them yet again.

[duncan228]

The Spurs’ unfinished offseason
by Timothy Varner
48 Minutes of

Consider this your morning twofer. R.C. Buford recently told the world the Spurs want to secure home court advantage for the postseason. In the same interview, Buford rehearsed San Antonio’s stipulated goals for the offseason that is nearly behind us.

We wanted to do what we could to keep together a group that had a lot of transition last year and to have a great deal of internal improvement. We wanted to add a big next to Tim Duncan, a wing defender and improve our shooting.

Keep reading →

*********************

The Spurs signal a change in philosophy
by Timothy Varner
48 Minutes of

http://www.48minutesof .com/2010/...phy/#more-9739

[lefty]

R.C is a funny guy

[ohmwrecker]

I believe a key game early in the season will be @ PHX on Wednesday, Nov. 3rd. The Suns won't have Amare...and that's big...but the Suns just added, yet, another long SF in Hedo. The Spurs won 1 of 7 meetings with the Suns last year and if Jason Richardson hadn't missed a wide open dunk in the last minute (to tie), the Spurs may have gone 0-fer against the Suns.

Can the Spurs defend the size and outside shooting of the Suns wing players? Can the Spurs switch and rotate quickly enough to keep the Suns from killing them yet again.

Run, run, run . . . Phoenix may be weakened as a playoff team with Amare's departure, but they are going to be a pretty good regular season team. They are going to outscore a lot of teams who can't run the floor or play excellent perimeter D. The Spurs have to improve their perimeter, rotation and help defense and try to limit fast break opportunities (high % shooting, limited turnovers, and good transition). Phoenix will be a good barometer for the Spurs who will need to improve in these areas to make a deep playoff run.

[TD 21]

I'm not a Jarvis Hayes fan. He's never played much defense in any game I've seen him play. Matador.

I'm not a fan, either. I just think he's the best fit out of what's left and I think it makes sense to add another body and one that has some experience in the league.

But what's the other option, honestly?

I understand what you're getting at as far as another body and vet to add but Hayes is an offensive player that's never shown the ability to defend. If the Spurs are going to add someone on the wing, that player needs to be able to defend. Hayes just ain't that guy - good size and a nice jumper but he only takes up a roster spot, he doesn't address a need.

Unless the Spurs can find someone who can really get into people -- preferably in a 6-6 or up frame -- I just don't see the wisdom in bringing a player like Hayes in, to say nothing of the potential LT implications if you believe the guy's more than a flier and someone you'd intend on keeping for the duration of the season.

What do you mean, "what's the other option"?

He's had spurts where he's been an adequate defender (mainly, when he was on the Pistons). He's far from a stopper obviously, but he's big and strong enough to at least not be physically overpowered or overwhelmed by bigger SF's.

Adding an experienced, prototypical SF sized body is filling a need, even if that player isn't all that good. See, right now, if Anderson isn't ready or can't defend SF's and/or Gee shows he's not an NBA player, then what? There's no one else to turn to.

What's the cost, really? More than likely the veteran's minimum and who knows, they may even be able to get him on a non-guaranteed contract at this point (I doubt it, though).

Do I really need to read past this?

I realize this is a rhetorical question, but my reasoning does makes sense, even if you don't agree with it.

[phxspurfan]

We're gonna get torched from the perimeter again. But at least Tim has a young, capable C playing next to him.

[Blackjack]

What do you mean, "what's the other option"?

Exactly that, what other option does he give you?

Hayes is essentially a poor man's Jefferson. Better shooter, but similar build and an offensive player. Difference is, Jefferson is a superior athlete and talent who will put the effort in on the defensive end, even if he's unsuccessful - and I believe we'll see a much better effort from RJ this year, as I believe the guy has some pride (last year had to be embarrassing).

The question I have is this: Who does Hayes take minutes from and who can he really play alongside? We saw how difficult it was for the Spurs to succeed last year defensively with their best talent on the floor because of an ill-fit. Hayes isn't a better defender than RJ, which means he'll need to play alongside better defenders. Problem is, the backup small forward needs to be one of those better defenders because of the way the team's constructed.

They don't need simply another option as in a body or proven NBA player, they need a particular skill: defense.

As far as the financial cost, the Spurs will only remain below the tax if they go with 13 players at this point. They could go with 14 or 15 to start and cut 1 or 2 before they had to suffer tax implications, but I don't see how exactly Hayes would be one of those players worth keeping - Temple's on the team as far as I'm concerned and Hayes would have to warrant being kept above Gee or another potential player, which would mean the Spurs viewed him as filling their defensive need on the perimeter.

Just don't see it.

[Mel_13]

Former Memphis Grizzlies F Trey Gilder worked out with San Antonio today.

http://twitter.com/scottschroeder

April, 2009 profile of Gilder's 2009 D-League season.

http://www.ridiculousupside.com/2009...es-trey-gilder

[Blackjack]

Good training camp-type.

He's definitely long, I'd just like to see someone whose mindset wouldn't have to be tweaked or altogether changed to excel on the defensive end.

But at least he's not 6-5.

[ohmwrecker]

Gilder is an interesting prospect. Looooong, good scorer, rebounder . . . get him to commit to playing D, turn him into a shot blocker and you're in business.

[TD 21]

Exactly that, what other option does he give you?

Hayes is essentially a poor man's Jefferson. Better shooter, but similar build and an offensive player. Difference is, Jefferson is a superior athlete and talent who will put the effort in on the defensive end, even if he's unsuccessful - and I believe we'll see a much better effort from RJ this year, as I believe the guy has some pride (last year had to be embarrassing).

The question I have is this: Who does Hayes take minutes from and who can he really play alongside? We saw how difficult it was for the Spurs to succeed last year defensively with their best talent on the floor because of an ill-fit. Hayes isn't a better defender than RJ, which means he'll need to play alongside better defenders. Problem is, the backup small forward needs to be one of those better defenders because of the way the team's constructed.

They don't need simply another option as in a body or proven NBA player, they need a particular skill: defense.

As far as the financial cost, the Spurs will only remain below the tax if they go with 13 players at this point. They could go with 14 or 15 to start and cut 1 or 2 before they had to suffer tax implications, but I don't see how exactly Hayes would be one of those players worth keeping - Temple's on the team as far as I'm concerned and Hayes would have to warrant being kept above Gee or another potential player, which would mean the Spurs viewed him as filling their defensive need on the perimeter.

Just don't see it.

He'd provide another proven player, who's in his prime and has ideal size for his position, at a position where this team lacks depth.

He wouldn't necessarily have to take minutes away from anyone, he'd just be another option, so that they're not completely dependent on two unproven players who'd be playing out of their natural position.

Why would he need to play alongside better defenders? That might be ideal, but it's not like Hayes is Morrison defensively and at this juncture, I don't see how anyone could say with any certainty that he's not at least in Anderson's and Gee's class defensively.

Obviously, Hayes is not ideal, far from it, but the Spurs aren't going to be able to acquire an ideal fit without parting with one of their key, young assets, which they're highly unlikely to do. The main thing is to add a proven player, for cheap, so that there's an alternative option in place.

How could they not need "simply another option as in a body or an NBA player"? They have one at the position.

They could start the year with Gee on the team, see how it goes with Hayes and Gee throughout the first half or so of the season (I agree, Temple is on the team), then make a decision by January 10th, when they'll have to decide whether to guarantee Gee for the season or not. If he's shown enough promise or outplayed Hayes, then they could either essentially give away Hayes like they did Ratliff last season or, if worst came to worst, cut him. It's not like they'd be paying him a lot to not play for them.

At this point, I don't see it either. Not after hearing Pop speak last week.

Good training camp-type.

He's definitely long, I'd just like to see someone whose mindset wouldn't have to be tweaked or altogether changed to excel on the defensive end.

But at least he's not 6-5.

Agreed. That's why I preferred Hairston to Gee. I thought he was a better fit, if not necessarily a better talent.

I hope Gee can surprise. He's certainly an intriguing talent, but I can't say I'm confident in him, which is why they should bring in a proven player at the three and not be entirely dependent on young, unproven players, who would both be playing out of position (though, ultimately, with his build and lack of ball handling skills, I see Gee as a three).

[mountainballer]

agree with all, who think a trade is the only chance to improve the perimeter defense.
if they sign Hayes, that's ok, brings some more depth and experience, but it does not make us significantely better. (Hayes would be more or less Finley of last season. don't know if we want this back)

trade for who? don't know.
I would be interested in Bill Waker from the Knicks. not that he was on the block, he played pretty impressive in his few games for the Knicks at the end of last season. but the Knicks brought in Azubuike and Mason and at SF they have Gallinari and Chandler. depends also if the Knicks make some more moves (Fernandez?). so he might be expendable.
why Walker? he doesn't have ideal size, but I think he has the potential to become a very good perimeter defender. and I somewhere read he has lost more than 20 lbs this summer, so he should be even quicker. (and I like him as a person. smart and funny guy. so maybe that's where the whole idea comes from)

[Bruno]

IIRC, CD liked Gilder upside.

What is a little worrying is that Spurs are still working out some long SF. Is it the usual "due diligence" workout or is it because Spurs still haven't find a SF they would like to have at their trainign camp?

[EricD]

IIRC, CD liked Gilder upside.

What is a little worrying is that Spurs are still working out some long SF. Is it the usual "due diligence" workout or is it because Spurs still haven't find a SF they would like to have at their trainign camp?

If they didn't think Anderson, Manu and Gee can contribute 13-18 minutes a night at the back up SF position, I'm pretty sure they would have addressed the "need" in July when there was better options.

[Mel_13]

If they didn't think Anderson, Manu and Gee can contribute 13-18 minutes a night at the back up SF position, I'm pretty sure they would have addressed the "need" in July when there was better options.

Sept. 23, 2009
Spurs Sign Keith Bogans

http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/keith_bogans_090923.html

[mountainballer]

If they didn't think Anderson, Manu and Gee can contribute 13-18 minutes a night at the back up SF position, I'm pretty sure they would have addressed the "need" in July when there was better options.

they reportedly tried to sign James Jones. so they tried to adress the need back then as well as today. you still need the player you want to agree to your offer.