Pop: Spurs to limit roster to 13 or 14

[Solid D]

A lot of NBA teams, not just the Spurs, would have a difficult time dealing with the Wizards putting out a 3 guard lineup like you mentioned. I wouldn't lose alot of sleep worrying over defending a eastern conference team you only play twice, and , in all likely hood, won't be seeing in the NBA finals.

Yeah, I haven't been.

I'm sure most people will notice the Spurs deficiencies soon enough.

[jjktkk]

Yeah, I haven't been.

I'm sure most people will notice the Spurs deficiencies soon enough.

Agree on the Spurs deficiencies, but IMO, they are more at the front court positions, than the backcourt. I like the trio of Ginoboli, Hill, and Parker, and the mix and match you can do with this trio. Throw in Anderson, Neal, and Temple, and I think were solid there. Anderson will also see time at the 3 IMO. I'm wondering If the Spurs are gonna go out and try to get a back up 3, or will they just go with what they got. Love your sig. pic, BTW. My favorite poster of all time.

[duncan228]

Popovich leans toward keeping 14 on Spurs roster
By Mike Monroe

On Sunday, Popovich said there was no hurry to make an additional cut. The coach, who doubles as president of basketball operations, has called the roster decisions he has faced this preseason some of the most difficult in his 14-year tenure on the bench.

“I think there's a good chance we'll start the season that way (with 14),” he said. “I'm not sure we'll stay that way, but most likely we'll start that way.”

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/s...wFullArticle=y

[toki9]

They must be saving Gee for a trade...

[Truth4sale$]

Gee will be picked up by another team if he is cut, and the spurs like some qualities in him. He is simply not Spurs caliber ready right now. Keeping him around allows him to develop. He will probably be assigned to the Toros until at least January to be reviewed.

[Bruno]

The deadline to trim rosters at 15 players is today at 6pm ET. If Spurs do a trade with Gee, it will likely be before that deadline.

[Solid D]

Agree on the Spurs deficiencies, but IMO, they are more at the front court positions, than the backcourt. I like the trio of Ginoboli, Hill, and Parker, and the mix and match you can do with this trio. Throw in Anderson, Neal, and Temple, and I think were solid there. Anderson will also see time at the 3 IMO. I'm wondering If the Spurs are gonna go out and try to get a back up 3, or will they just go with what they got. Love your sig. pic, BTW. My favorite poster of all time.

Thanks, it's a favorite of mine also, but it became my sig as a remembrance of whottt. He stuck that poster in my profile about a year and a half ago.

With regard to the deficiencies, I think the bigger deficiencies are defensively on the wing and defensively at the 1, in that order. The Spurs have had a hole in the front court that was filled by Splitter, as long as he can take the floor and stay healthy. He's not perfect but he should improve the interior defense. I posted this in July and still believe it to be true.

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...8&postcount=10

[Solid D]

Well, as anticipated, Patrick Beverly was released by the Heat today along with Butler.

http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_ar...tler_beverley/

Heat Release Butler, Beverley
Oct 25, 2010 5:13 PM EST
The Heat have trimmed their roster to the league maximum of 15 players ahead of Tuesday's season opener against the Celtics.

Miami released guards Da'Sean Butler and Patrick Beverley.

Butler was one of the team's three second-round picks this past June and he had been recovering from knee surgery after tearing his ACL while playing with West Virginia in the NCAA tournament.

Beverley, a second-round pick in 2009, spent last season playing in Greece after the Heat acquired him in a draft-night trade.

[duncan228]

Spurs' roster: 14 going on 13?
By Jeff McDonald

...The Spurs will open the season with 14, but probably will only keep that many until Thanksgiving at the latest.

http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblog...roster-14.html

[Solid D]

http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblog...roster-14.html

I thought it was somewhat humorous that Pop didn't even know how many players they currently had on the roster.

[ChuckD]

Technically, Gee's guaranteed money allows them to keep him until late November without consequence. There would be little point in cutting him before then. He's a practice body and injury insurance.

Spurs' roster: 14 going on 13?
By Jeff McDonald

...The Spurs will open the season with 14, but probably will only keep that many until Thanksgiving at the latest.

Someone stole my mailbox key. You're welcome, fool.

[duncan228]

#spurs inactive list, as turned into the league: Splitter and Gee. That can change before tipoff Wednesday, but it won't.

[Solid D]

Pacers @ Spurs
Hibbert, Granger and Collison should give the Spurs some trouble.

Spurs
5 Duncan.....McDyess
4 Blair..........Bonner
3 Jefferson...Anderson..Simmons
2 Ginobili......Neal
1 Parker.......Hill...........Temple

[Agloco]

The Spurs have 11 fully guaranteed contracts:

TP / Hill
Anderson / Manu / Neal
RJ
Dice / Blair / Bonner
Duncan / Splitter

From there, I think the team needs a third PG and a backup SF.

No defensive minded 7 footer eh?

[Spursfanfromafar]

No defensive minded 7 footer eh?

Tim Duncan.

[Solid D]

Pacers @ Spurs
Hibbert (28 pts, 9 reb, 3 blk), Granger (26 pts) and Collison (19 pts, 7 A) should give the Spurs some trouble.

Spurs
5 Duncan.....McDyess
4 Blair..........Bonner
3 Jefferson...Anderson..Simmons
2 Ginobili......Neal
1 Parker.......Hill...........Temple

Plus Josh McRoberts with 11, nice game for him.

All of the Spurs starters played well except for Blair. Pacers had too much length on him and he didn't play smart by using pump fakes, footwork, and reverse layups against McRoberts and Hibbert.

Interesting that Neal didn't get much PT against the Pacers. Hill and Ginobili got almost all of the minutes at the SG slot.

[TD 21]

Plus Josh McRoberts with 11, nice game for him.

All of the Spurs starters played well except for Blair. Pacers had too much length on him and he didn't play smart by using pump fakes, footwork, and reverse layups against McRoberts and Hibbert.

Interesting that Neal didn't get much PT against the Pacers. Hill and Ginobili got almost all of the minutes at the SG slot.

Not that McRoberts doesn't have decent length, but if McRoberts qualifies as "too much length" for Blair, then the Spurs have a problem. Hibbert is understandable.

Not surprised Neal didn't play until the result was decided. Who would he have guarded? The Pacers didn't have an SG in the rotation, all they played were 6-8 or 6-9 SF's on the wings, save for that brief stretch where Collison and Ford were in together. Neal is too small to cover big SF's and not quick enough to cover lightning quick PG's, so there really was no match-up for him in this game.

Against the Hornets, it'll be a different story. Not that he's assured of playing, but they're loaded with undersized two's (Belinelli, Thornton, Bayless and Green), so he could get some run.

[Solid D]

Not that McRoberts doesn't have decent length, but if McRoberts qualifies as "too much length" for Blair, then the Spurs have a problem. Hibbert is understandable.

Not surprised Neal didn't play until the result was decided. Who would he have guarded? The Pacers didn't have an SG in the rotation, all they played were 6-8 or 6-9 SF's on the wings, save for that brief stretch where Collison and Ford were in together. Neal is too small to cover big SF's and not quick enough to cover lightning quick PG's, so there really was no match-up for him in this game.

Without Splitter, of course the Spurs have a problem, when Blair is going to get boxed out and overshadowed in the paint like he did tonight. Is that even up for discussion?

When Pop goes small against TJ Ford and a bunch of 6-8 guys...if Hill isn't playing well, then Neal is an option...as long as he can score. Hill and Gino played well, so no major need for Neal. I was just saying it was interesting because it would not be beyond Pop to go small with a 4-inch height differential if he can get scoring when it's needed. Neal is only an inch shorter than middling, so-so defender Roger Mason, Jr..

[Solid D]

Also, after all of the small-ball Pop has played over the years, is there really any concern on Pop's part about a 6-4 guy guarding a 6-7 or 6-8 guy? Not really. Just like he did tonight, Pop traps the dribbler to create turnovers and to dilute the mismatch. It worked to the tune of a 15-9 points advantage.

[TD 21]

Without Splitter, of course the Spurs have a problem, when Blair is going to get boxed out and overshadowed in the paint like he did tonight. Is that even up for discussion?

When Pop goes small against TJ Ford and a bunch of 6-8 guys...if Hill isn't playing well, then Neal is an option...as long as he can score. Hill and Gino played well, so no major need for Neal. I was just saying it was interesting because it would not be beyond Pop to go small with a 4-inch height differential if he can get scoring when it's needed. Neal is only an inch shorter than middling, so-so defender Roger Mason, Jr..

Also, after all of the small-ball Pop has played over the years, is there really any concern on Pop's part about a 6-4 guy guarding a 6-7 or 6-8 guy? Not really. Just like he did tonight, Pop traps the dribbler to create turnovers and to dilute the mismatch. It worked to the tune of a 15-9 points advantage.

I didn't question whether it was a problem or not in the game last night, I meant big picture, if a guy like McRoberts qualifies as too much length for Blair, then that's a problem that goes beyond just that one game.

No, Neal is not an option in that scenario and I suspect that is why he didn't play until long after the result was decided and garbage time had commenced. He can't guard pint sized jet setters and he can't guard big, long wings and that made up the entirety of the Pacers perimeter rotation last night.

It's more than a four inch height differential. Having seen Neal stand beside Hill, I can tell you he's the exact same height, which means he's really 6-2. Hill is a 6-2 guy who sometimes guards long wings, because he's long himself and the Spurs don't exactly have a lot of options to put on top opposition wing scorers. But Neal isn't just short, he's not long or strong, either. Guys like Udoka and Bogans aren't tall or long, but they're strong, so Pop would match them up against significantly bigger players on occasion. Neal is more like Mason, in that he needs to be played in selective match-ups, not without regard for the match-up.

[Solid D]

No, Neal is not an option in that scenario and I suspect that is why he didn't play until long after the result was decided and garbage time had commenced.

If you were the coach of the Spurs, this must be true because you said it. The problem with your premise is that even though you and I might handle matchups this way, Gregg Popovich doesn't always handle them this way. He has a history of going small depending on what he thinks the Spurs need.

It's more than a four inch height differential. Having seen Neal stand beside Hill, I can tell you he's the exact same height, which means he's really 6-2. .

I disagree with you regading Neal being 6'2". I have seen Hill stand beside Neal, as well. I have also seen Neal stand near Chip and they are about the same height. Engelland is a good 6'4".
Neal most definitely is lacking the 6'9" wingspan of Hill, but like I said before, if Hill wasn't playing well, Pop hasn't been afraid to play a guard like Neal or Mason to get scoring...even if it meant they had to guard someone like Paul George.

Measurements aren't so important when it comes to the mind of Pop. Maybe you understand that, but I'm not seeing that in your posts.

[TD 21]

If you were the coach of the Spurs, this must be true because you said it. The problem with your premise is that even though you and I might handle matchups this way, Gregg Popovich doesn't always handle them this way. He has a history of going small depending on what he thinks the Spurs need.



I disagree with you regading Neal being 6'2". I have seen Hill stand beside Neal, as well. I have also seen Neal stand near Chip and they are about the same height. Engelland is a good 6'4".
Neal most definitely is lacking the 6'9" wingspan of Hill, but like I said before, if Hill wasn't playing well, Pop hasn't been afraid to play a guard like Neal or Mason to get scoring...even if it meant they had to guard someone like Paul George.

Measurements aren't so important when it comes to the mind of Pop. Maybe you understand that, but I'm not seeing that in your posts.

Where did I say he didn't? Re-read what I wrote, because it's clear you didn't comprehend it.

If you've seen Hill stand beside Neal, then you wouldn't disagree with my assertion that Neal is 6-2.

Maybe so, but this isn't the Spurs team's of the recent past. This team has plenty of firepower. Of course, it won't be evident every night, but by in large he shouldn't have to find minutes for a guy like Neal consistently on the basis of this team needing more scoring. When Mason was around, particularly the first season, Pop had no choice. The Spurs desperately needed his offense, even if it meant putting him in disadvantageous match-ups.

[Solid D]

Where did I say he didn't? Re-read what I wrote, because it's clear you didn't comprehend it.

When you rule out that option by saying:

No, Neal is not an option in that scenario.

then you are ruling out Pop's prerogative to use Neal as an option. Pretty clear cut, to me. Unless, you would like to change "No, Neal is not an option in that scenario" to something a little more compromising.

If you've seen Hill stand beside Neal, then you wouldn't disagree with my assertion that Neal is 6-2.

I have seen them, in person, like a lot of other people have. This is going nowhere.

Maybe so, but this isn't the Spurs team's of the recent past. This team has plenty of firepower. Of course, it won't be evident every night, but by in large he shouldn't have to find minutes for a guy like Neal consistently on the basis of this team needing more scoring. When Mason was around, particularly the first season, Pop had no choice. The Spurs desperately needed his offense, even if it meant putting him in disadvantageous match-ups.

If Neal doesn't hit shots, it won't matter. If he does hit his shots, the Spurs will need his firepower because they sure aren't playing much defense.

[TD 21]

When you rule out that option by saying: then you are ruling out Pop's prerogative to use Neal as an option. Pretty clear cut, to me. Unless, you would like to change "No, Neal is not an option in that scenario" to something a little more compromising.



I have seen them, in person, like a lot of other people have. This is going nowhere.



If Neal doesn't hit shots, it won't matter. If he does hit his shots, the Spurs will need his firepower because they sure aren't playing much defense.

That's different than refuting "he has a history of going small depending on what he thinks the Spurs need."

If you have, then you'd concur that Neal is more 6-2 than he is 6-4.

What "won't matter"? Sure they'll need his "firepower" if injuries arise or if it's just one of those games that happen to every team during the course of a grueling season, where the key players have dead legs and the team can't hit a shot to save their lives. But generally speaking, if this team is healthy, Neal will likely be either a fringe rotation player or be out of the rotation altogether.

For all the talk about the Spurs defense or lack thereof, they did finish 9th in efficiency last season and though it didn't look like it for half a game last night, they should be an improved defensive team this season. It would be an upset of epic proportions were they to resemble the defense of their heyday in the slightest, but nonetheless, this is still one of the better defensive teams in the league, which is often overlooked.