Stinging Buck Harvey article on Jefferson

[Uriel]

“You know, in football, when there’s a pile and the runner is tackled?” a Spurs coach said not long ago. “Richard is the guy who runs in when the play is over and jumps into the pile.”

Read more:
http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursna...erves-amnesty/

[objective]

I posted on the RJ amnesty thread a longer version here, but here's the stinger for this thread:

... Harvey's piece today basically laying the groundwork for RJ to be amnestied, and we're good to go. Harvey is satisfying the usual requirements for the way the Spurs-SA Media works. The Spurs feed their agenda to the media, and the media pukes it into the groundwater to prepare the fanbase for the taste.

Then when it does happen, all the people who were just repeating, "RJ just needs a better system!" and "RJ is better than some 2nd rounder, even though he got tooled on by a 2nd round minimum player like Sam Young!" instead will be saying, "Yeah, RJ is like the football player who dives on the pile when the plays over! I like football, I like the Cowboys, and this RJ character just isn't good. CIA Pop is at it again, cutting off the barnacles and loose ends! Mario Elie was so tough, not like RJ!"

[silverblk mystix]

You missed the point here....the amnesty is for Popovich...


Pop screwed up just as bad in acquiring RJ...but POP always gets pardoned....it is always someone else's fault...or Pop brought 4 rings to the franchise....

or Blake's fave...."who else that is available now would you replace Pop with?"


Pop is the reason the Spurs didn't win 6 or 7 les....THAT is the true way a winner looks at things....instead of ....Pop won 4 rings....we owe him...blah...blah

[objective]

the phrase "the amnesty is for Pop" is Harvey's way of advancing the Spurs agenda while protecting Pop.

It's telling the fans that it's not really Pop's fault, he should be celebrated and given amnesty from criticism.

It's not a legit knock of Pop from Harvey. It was Pop being fooled by RJ, Pop 'wanting to believe', Pop 'going against his instincts', blah blah blah.

This was an article to set people up against RJ (which they should have been anyway).

And if RJ doesn't get amnestied after all?

Well, no big deal then either for the Spurs in the media. Because the SA media is far too cowardly to use the anonymous Spurs coach quote in any future story. Think they're going to ask Pop or RC at camp about having a player who by their own staff's description doesn't give honest effort? Please.

[Fireball]

Pop is the reason the Spurs didn't win 6 or 7 les....THAT is the true way a winner looks at things....instead of ....Pop won 4 rings....we owe him...blah...blah

Sorry, but that is a way a true WHINER looks at things.

[Giuseppe]

#'s 1,2,3,4...

Bomb diggity!

[Bruno]

E-N's Spurs coverage is just awful.

[SenorSpur]

Normally one would have to search long and hard to find fault with one of the FO's decision, but for the life of me, I don't what Pop and RC were thinking. On the surface, the RJ signing looked like a perfect fit. Yet, he's been a "fish out of water" since day one.

I still think RJ is a good player, who could flourish on another team, and as part of another style of offense. Sure he's got his flaws - mentally and athletically now - but I don't think he's as bad of a players as he's been with the Spurs.

What makes this worse, as the article states, Pop was part of the coaching staff for the 2004 games, and knew saw RJ up close for many weeks. Why on earth did he go against his better judgement and sign this guy anyway?

I hate to admit it, but Pop and RC should both be roundly criticized for this one.

[ChuckD]

Sorry, but that is a way a true WHINER looks at things.

[TDMVPDPOY]

Normally one would have to search long and hard to find fault with one of the FO's decision, but for the life of me, I don't what Pop and RC were thinking. On the surface, the RJ signing looked like a perfect fit. Yet, he's been a "fish out of water" since day one.

I still think RJ is a good player, who could flourish on another team, and as part of another style of offense. Sure he's got his flaws - mentally and athletically now - but I don't think he's as bad of a players as he's been with the Spurs.

What makes this worse, as the article states, Pop was part of the coaching staff for the 2004 games, and knew saw RJ up close for many weeks. Why on earth did he go against his better judgement and sign this guy anyway?

I hate to admit it, but Pop and RC should both be roundly criticized for this one.

RJ has been since 04 olympic games when he signed that extention from the nets b4 the games, and he did all trying to live up to the contract ever since then caving in.......but the problem was fkn pop on the end of the tunnel running towards rj who thinks he still has it....

[dbestpro]

The problem for RJ is as simple as the chemistry between him and TP. RJ needs a distributing guard to do well. RJ does not do enough of the little things to complement a score first point guard. Most of TPs points are through penetration, which is also the best of RJs game. RJ has to sacrifice that part of his game to try and compliment the guards. Instead of succeeding he often has sulked and moped because he is because he is asked to do something different than what he does best.

Pop worked with him in the off season with an idea to change to Spurs offense to accommodate RJ. They did this for a few games and RJ looked pretty good. As the season progressed RJ was asked to do other things to pick up the slack of Blair and Bonner and everything just cascaded down hill from there.

The Spurs system needs a SF who excels at man to man defense, can hit the corner three, and get back on defense when the guards penetrate and miss. Attacking the basket and rebounds are nice, but is not what is asked from the SF in the Spurs system (unless Bonner is on the floor). The problem is the SF needs to be in two places at once when Bonner and Blair are on the floor at the same time.

[ElNono]

Hindsight is 20/20... I don't think taking a gamble on RJ was the wrong thing to do... especially for what we gave up for him, and the state of the team at that time.

That said, giving him that extension last offseason was. Even if you argue they didn't want to take the financial hit then, they certainly took the financial hit the last playoffs, and look to keep taking a hit as long as he's around. It was a shortsighted decision that now has the team on a bind.

Worst of all, I don't think there's going to be many suitors for RJ if he's amnestied, at least not that are willing to pay a good portion of his current deal (which goes to show how bad was it), meaning the Spurs would still be on the hook for paying that deal. On the other hand, with a lot of teams needing to fill up rosters, this might be the right time to do it. Difficult decisions all around.

[TimmehC]

I tend to agree that RJ is a pretty good player, but doesn't fit with this roster, or the style of play the Spurs employ. But, as the article says, Pop freaking coached him at the olympics. In other words, Pop already knew what RJ's skillset was, and still pulled the trigger on the trade and then extension.

Is having RJ better than Bruce, Fab, and KT all being gone to retirement without making a trade for replacements? Probably, but who knows what other moves they could have pulled off if they had waited instead of having such a knee-jerk reaction to the lack of scoring with Manu hurt in the 09 playoffs.

[DMC]

You missed the point here....the amnesty is for Popovich...


Pop screwed up just as bad in acquiring RJ...but POP always gets pardoned....it is always someone else's fault...or Pop brought 4 rings to the franchise....

or Blake's fave...."who else that is available now would you replace Pop with?"


Pop is the reason the Spurs didn't win 6 or 7 les....THAT is the true way a winner looks at things....instead of ....Pop won 4 rings....we owe him...blah...blah

"The true way a winner looks at things..." ???


Like whom?

It sounds like an excuse more than an outlook.

What other small market team had anything close to the Spurs success that SA has seen during Pop's coaching tenure?

Small market teams do not win 6 or 7 rings with one core group. It's never happened, there's no reason to think it ever will.

In fact, since MJ, no single player has ever won 6 rings on any single squad. Kobe is the closest with 5 and they had moments of total domination and HOFers galore.

Pop didn't injure his players, didn't cause Manu to foul Dirk, didn't make the .4 second shot go in.

RJ needs to go, that much I agree with, and keeping him around was Pop's fault, somewhat, but you cannot say that Pop cost the Spurs 2 or 3 rings.

[DesignatedT]

You missed the point here....the amnesty is for Popovich...


Pop screwed up just as bad in acquiring RJ...but POP always gets pardoned....it is always someone else's fault...or Pop brought 4 rings to the franchise....

Yes, Pop and the FO screwed up on RJ... not just once but twice. That's pretty obvious.

Pop is the reason the Spurs didn't win 6 or 7 les....THAT is the true way a winner looks at things....instead of ....Pop won 4 rings....we owe him...blah...blah

You're re ed.

[DMC]

Hindsight is 20/20... I don't think taking a gamble on RJ was the wrong thing to do... especially for what we gave up for him, and the state of the team at that time.

That said, giving him that extension last offseason was. Even if you argue they didn't want to take the financial hit then, they certainly took the financial hit the last playoffs, and look to keep taking a hit as long as he's around. It was a shortsighted decision that now has the team on a bind.

Worst of all, I don't think there's going to be many suitors for RJ if he's amnestied, at least not that are willing to pay a good portion of his current deal (which goes to show how bad was it), meaning the Spurs would still be on the hook for paying that deal. On the other hand, with a lot of teams needing to fill up rosters, this might be the right time to do it. Difficult decisions all around.

The Spurs would pay part of his salary but it wouldn't be counted toward the cap.

It's pretty bad when you would rather pay someone to leave than pay them almost the same to stay, but the Spurs need someone in that position who is going to perform.

It's all moot though. Tim is one and done likely and the "one" is going to be a farewell tour.

[DesignatedT]

The extension was where they messed up. Not trading Bowen and KT for RJ.

Other major programs also mess up like this quite often with bad contracts/extensions/trades whatever it may be, but it seems a of a lot easier for say, LA, Miami or a big market team to get out of this bind and move a player with a bad contract than it is for small market teams like us.

[DPG21920]

That's true. I don't see how ANY Spurs fan can fault the Spurs for trading for RJ. They are an amazing front office and invested heavily with the intention of trying to win. It obviously didn't work out, but as a fan I don't see how people can be upset at the original trade when it was made with great intentions.

Like many of us have said, it's the extension after seeing it was failed that you can have issue with. Without that, we wouldn't be in this position.

[lefty]

Sorry, but that is a way a true WHINER looks at things.

Then I'm a whiner too


Pop

[superbigtime]

I was 'thrilled' to acquire RJ with the trading of the old dudes, still hoping that Fab and/or Bruce would find their way back to SA which never ended up happening. But hopes and expectations quickly contracted during his first season. I don't fault the FO for the trade but like others am not pleased with his contract signing last year. Athletic though RJ may be, this dude is a softie and a mental midget and we have had a couple of those types for a while now especially in the playoffs (Red Rocket and G Hill). Trading G Hill for Kawhi will definitely pay off. The FO may be stupid with contract extensions and trades with many recent examples, but they know how to draft. Leonard will blossom into RJs replacement sooner than later if Pop just plays him. I don't care how much it costs the Spurs organization, Amnesty RJs ass and get players with balls, at ude and pride. Last years' playoff 'run' was a sad joke. Spurs were out muscled and out played. I just hope Pop shows some restraint playing 'small and athletically- and mentally-challenged ball' this year.

[Obstructed_View]

I wasn't in love with trading Bowen, just from a personal standpoint, and KT sure turned out to have a lot more left in his tank than anyone thought, but trading for RJ was an honest attempt to get an impact player to the team and was also a sign of the team's financial commitment to trying for ring number 5. No problem with that whatsoever.

There's nothing that can convince me that having a secret deal to let him opt out and re-sign him was a good idea. The Spurs had buyer's remorse about RJ and tried to lessen that hit by throwing good money after bad, while simultaneously telling RJ that he needed to really work on his game. Unfortunately you can't develop heart in the gym. Publicly critisizing the player that you signed to an extension is chicken . Also, it pretty much kills any chance you might have of trading him to a team who only looks at his stats.

[Dex]

Sometimes in poker, you make the right play, but the cards just don't fall for you. The Spurs made what seemed to be the high percentage move, but just got suckered on a bad beat.

Happens all the time, but just like in poker, the important thing is not to go on tilt and let it affect your next hands. Giving RJ another 3 years was the equivalent of doing that. The amnesty is the chance to correct that mistake.

[tmtcsc]

I didn't think it was stinging at all. It was completely accurate. RJ was never a very compe ive guy. I thought it was a weak acquisition from the get and just hoped for the best. Pop and the coaching staff couldn't change what wasn't there. He started off great last year but then faded when he remembered who he was.

We didn't give up much to get him as far as personnel but we did hamstring ourselves as far as dealing with his salary.

He's been crap for us and has been a waste. Sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. This was an "L" for the FO.

[stephen jackson]

cant hate on the trade, we got him for almost nothing, we just expected way more out of him.
also the fault can also be blamed on parker if we had a distributing pg rj could have flourished and became great... maybe the problem isnt rj but tony parker.

[DPG21920]

No ^