Reply With Quote
It's like the role players in the roster all present a conundrum. If Mills would step his game up and stake claim to the spot then he would be the choice. No one wants to breakout of the pack, it seems!
I'll be blunt: I think Gary Neal needs to go, for several reasons.
One part of it is his play. Although I'm not forgetting how good he's been with the Spurs (exhibit A: that crazy play against the Clippers last year), right now he's too "off and on" to be of any value. Everything except his shooting is a huge downside: he can't bring the ball up the court, he can't dribble or protect the ball, he doesn't defend, he's not engaged enough to avoid mistakes such as being positioned correctly for an inbound pass or not making a costly foul. Right now based on his play alone he should be in Pop's doghouse. Furthermore the Spurs seemed to be clicking a lot more when he was injured. He'd have to be back at this "assassin" shooting level to counterbalance some of his downsides, but even his shooting is iffy.
The other, more important part, is the effect playing him has on the Spurs system and on other players right now. Regardless of any positives he might bring to the table, Neal is currently a big issue in the rotation. There's simply no spot for a pure 2 in the current rotation, as Manu and Green have claimed this spot. In order for him to play, either Manu has to play out of position (and given Manu's current form this is the last thing we want) or Neal is the PG and we all know how that ends.
Re: Manu I don't think it's a surprise Manu played better when Neal was out, as he could go back to what he does well. Manu + Neal = Turnobili rearing his ugly head.
Re: De Colo/Mills, Neal is currently harming the development of these players in the same way Bonner/Blair have been blocking Splitter's development. De Colo is currently hitting the rookie wall, but he won't get over that wall by sitting on the bench. It's a normal process and the only way to break it and come out ahead is to keep plowing. Mills seems like a good enough shooter for the Spurs needs, and he brings several intangibles to the table (among which energy, passion and a modi of defense) that Neal sorely lacks.
I'm not saying that Neal isn't worthy of a roster spot on a team of the Spurs caliber, especially given his very favorable contract. But right now is the time to acknowledge that the emergence of new players, and the needs of older players, mean the Spurs have outgrown Neal, and he is no longer needed around these parts... his presence on the team is a net negative.
It's like the role players in the roster all present a conundrum. If Mills would step his game up and stake claim to the spot then he would be the choice. No one wants to breakout of the pack, it seems!
as long as OKC keeps Martin, Clippers keeps Crawford and Miami keeps Allen there is no argument that makes sense for neal to go.
I agree that Neal is currently "harming" the development of De Colo and Mills, as well as Cojo. Pop's blind faith in Neal as PG makes these players afraid to play their game. They worry that any mistake will take them out of contention.....ie...turn overs and missed shots. Why is it Mills can have 12 assists in a game or De Colo can shoot when it doesn't count?
I have been saying this for weeks.
It all depends on what you get for him in return. No way we cut him obviously. So you are of course talking about a trade. Neal has his flaws yes, but he brings clutch shooting and instant offense when our offense stagnates. And his contract is more than reasonable. He is certainly not untouchable, but who are you going to bring in that is going to be a dramatic upgrade for 1 million a year? It is not likely you are going to find trade.
Neal is cool for what he provides. I don't think we should get rid of Neal. I would rather have someone stable at backup PG and then let Neal do his thing either at backup PG for a few minutes or at backup SG for a few minutes. Not the "established backup PG", but a mercenary when he hits the court.
To put it in another way, there are 6 players for a 4-5 players rotation, and Neal is simply the odd one out.
For the PG spot, Parker is the obvious #1, and re: the back-up there's no solution that's better (and I'm not talking on paper but in reality) than playing De Colo. He might not be the greatest back-up PG ever at this stage, but it's impossible to say he's worse than the other options, given how bad the other guys are playing. So even if he is at time indecisive or turnover-prone, it can't be worse than Neal or Mills. And Manu can be the #3 PG if there's a real need.
For the 2-guard spot, Green holds the starting job and Manu the back-up job. That leaves only a few minutes for another guard, and I personally think Mills is as good as Neal in this role. He also brings instant offense to the table, maybe a bit less but more consistently, and a lot more energy/defense. I'm not strictly against Neal in this role, but Pop is obviously tempted to play Neal a lot more than he should, which was this proposition very risky. At least with Mills Pop knows that's the only role he can possibly fill and the risk is lower.
Right now any combination of Tony, Manu, De Colo and Mills works + Tony with Green (not so much Green with the other three). In comparison we know the Neal-Manu and Neal-Mills combos don't work, which reinforces the fact that Neal is the odd one out. Neal is only good with Tony (but then again, everybody is, except De Colo).
Re: the return, at this stage the way Neal affects the Spurs is so negative that I couldn't care less. Bundle him with some other scrubs we have for some other team's scrubs. Maybe these new scrubs will fit better. The situation can't possibly be worse when it comes to these 3 players. And if the FO really think another team is going to jump at Neal if he's cut, then nail him to the bench for good. Or light a fire under his ass, whatever. We're in the situation where decent prospects like De Colo or Mills are afraid to do 1/10th of the mistakes Neal does for fear of being benched. Furthermore if Neal is too valuable to be cut, then it shouldn't be that hard to find a trade.
Neal is currently our leading scorer outside the big 3, and he hasn't exactly been shooting the lights out. His shooting and 3p% are the lowest of his career right now. His 3pt shooting will likely trend back into his typical 40%. My favorite thing about Neal, and same goes with Jax, is the penchant for hitting big shots
De Colo is still way too passive and raw. I know you have a thing for Frenchies, but especially in the playoffs his lack of aggressiveness will be exposed. Patty I like but hes just as big of a chucker as Neal minus the reputation of making big shots, and his defense is nothing to brag about...cant say he lacks energy but it doesnt always translate into effective D.
This is irrelevant to the discussion. What would be relevant would be to point out a player currently on the Spurs roster who fills the back-up PG spot better than De Colo. If you think Neal is a better back-up PG then we'll just have to agree to disagree.
i'll take De Colo over Neal simply because he's more of a natural PG (ie better handling, better instincts etc...). I'd like to see De Colo get more time to see if he can improve and take it to another level. Neal is a uva shooter but a huge liability when the shots aren't falling.
in other words he's lacking confidence and experience... 2 things Pop won't give you unless you're a crazy shooter or an undersized C...
Last edited by biskvito; 01-04-2013 at 07:09 PM.
No.
I agree Neal should go plus his value is pretty good right now. He's the guy you want on the other team so you can attack his lack of defense.
He's playing injured. What do you expect?
spurs’-neal-plays-in-pain
If we can get a good return by removing him (along dumping Bonner & Blair contract altogether), then why not. But if not, then wtf you clowns talking about ??
Neal should learn how to be a damn PG since they keep playing him at the position.
This is not limited to his recent outing against the Knicks. Even before he was injured he was a rotation headache.
If you want to trade Neal, he'd need to be packaged with other players because his salary is so cheap. Plus he's in a contract year, maybe teams don't want to just loan him for half a season. Or if they want him, they can wait until the summer.
I don't see any realistic situation in which trading Neal makes the Spurs better
Send him to a ty team where he can take 20 + shots a game without feeling guilty. Be fun to see him be a full time gunner for some team. He isn't what this team needs and he can fit better elsewhere.
post. De Colo can't play backup PG with Manu as playmaker, he's useless as a spot up shooter which is what he becomes if Manu is handling the ball. Neal is perfect for this role, and Mills just sucks.
It isn't an ideal situation, but neither is it a glaring emergency. Get a PF.
Imagine Neal defending Ty Lawson or Damian Lillard? That's a bit of a worry.... Mills and De Colo aren't great defenders themselves, but at least they can stay in front of their man.
Last edited by Boomersgold; 01-05-2013 at 12:42 PM.
Where did I say the Spurs should play De Colo as SG and Manu as PG? This is the dumbest thing I've ever read. Learn to read before claiming a post is . Manu isn't a playmaker any more, if you haven't noticed. Actually he never really was or the Spurs wouldn't have been on the hunt for years for a back-up PG that never materialized (Vaughn, Ford...)
Manu and De Colo works better than Manu and Neal, that much is obvious.
And seeing as the Spurs offense stalls whenever Parker isn't on the court, I'd say it's a "glaring emergency", especially since putting Neal in trade offers could land the Spurs the PF they need. I don't see how the Spurs could be worse with a PF instead of Neal on the roster...
The problem is that Neal has a below market contract, and the spurs are up against the luxury tax. Players that can be traded for straight up are either on rookie contracts and considered futures to the team and aren't going to be traded, or are really just roster filler. Which would mean looking for packaging Neal with someone else as sweetener for the other team to take on a questionable contract. That means Jackson, Blair, Manu, or Bonner. Manu will not be traded as he is an all time historic Spurs player (not happening the backlash over Bowen being traded is still happening). Jackson as an expiring is traded bait on his own but it is a possibility. Bonner isn't exciting enough as a trade addition and to other teams, and he's just serviceable during the regular season. Blair is a short broken center. For the spurs they essentially have Neal and Mills to add as sweetener to a package of Bonner, Blair or both to get a decent bench PF for certain or a big with issues and potential. You have to find a team that is in need of a SG in a big way either as a back-up or as a starter to be willing to make that trade. In theory both are capable of playing some point but most teams in the league have realized that either as a pg is a spot minutes thing not a night in night out back-up.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
